DAGADU @ SUBHASH ASHOK KHANDBHOR (UTP)versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                                                32.APL-1958.26.DOC




             Digitally signed
             by PRACHI
                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
PRACHI       PRANESH
PRANESH      NANDIWADEKAR
NANDIWADEKAR
             Date: 2026.10.06
                                            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
             16:27:32 +0530
                                          CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1958 OF 2026

                        Dagadu @ Subhash Ashok Khandbhor (UTP)                 … Applicant
                                   V/s.
                        State of Maharashtra                                   …. Respondent
                                                      ______________________

                        Mr. Shailesh Kharat a/w Mr. Onkar Chaudhari, for the Applicant.
                        Mr. Shahaji Shinde, ‘B’ Panel Counsel for the Respondent-State.
                        Mr. A.V. Gadekar, API attached to Vadgaon, Maval, Pune present.
                                                  ______________________

                                                      CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
                                                      DATED : 5 OCTOBER 2026
                        P. C. :-

                        1.         Heard Mr. Kharat,      learned counsel appearing for the

                        Applicant and Mr. Shinde, ‘B’ Panel Counsel appearing for the

                        Respondent-State.



                        2.         By this application, the Applicant is challenging the legality

                        and validity of the order dated 2 September 2026 passed below

                        Exhibit-217 in S.C. No.478 of 2022 as also the order dated 11

                        September 2026 passed below Exhibit-210 in S. C. No.478 of 2022

                        by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadgaon Maval, Dist.

                        Pune.




                                                            Page 1
                        PPN
                                                         32.APL-1958.26.DOC




3.    Perusal of the record shows that Supreme Court by an order

dated 27 May 2026 passed in Special Leave to Appeal No.5468 of

2026, directed the learned concerned Sessions Court to conclude

the trial within a period of 6 months and further directed that in

the event, trial is inconclusive within the aforesaid time-frame,

Balu Maruti Gosavi i.e. petitioner in Special Leave to Appeal has

been granted liberty to file a fresh bail application.



4.    Mr. Kharat, learned counsel appearing for the Applicant

states that Application below Exhibit-217 was filed seeking time

for cross-examination of the Investigating Officer and Exhibit-210

has been filed for seeking permission to cross-examine PW-7-

Prashant Vilas Dongre, who is the eyewitness (wrongly mentioned

as Panch Witness in the Application)



5.    Mr. Kharat, learned counsel for the Applicant states that that

on 10 August 2026, the Advocate of the present Applicant was not

well and, therefore, cross-examination could not be conducted.

However, immediately, on 24 August, 2026, application bearing

Exhibit-210 was filed seeking to cross-examine the said eye witness

Mr. Prashant Vilas Dongre. He submitted that the application




                                 Page 2
PPN
                                                     32.APL-1958.26.DOC




below Exhibit-217 is filed seeking time to cross-examine the

Investigating Officer as the said Application bearing Exhibit-210

was pending.



6.    Learned APP states that as the Supreme Court has expedited

the trial, therefore, the impugned order be not interferred with. He

submits that the Applications are filed for delaying the trial.


7.    However, perusal of the record shows that on 10 August

2026, PW 7-Prashant Vilas Dongre could not be cross examined as

the learned advocate of the present Applicant who is Accused No.6

was not well. Immediately thereafter, on 24 August 2026,

Application bearing Exhibit- 210 has been filed seeking setting

aside “No cross” order. The time to cross examine the Investigating

Officer was also sought on the same ground that aforesaid

Application bearing Exhibit-210 is pending, seeking to set aside the

said order and permitting cross examination of PW 7-Prashant

Vilas Dongre.

8.    In the facts and circumstances and the interest of justice,

impugned order dated 11 September, 2026 passed by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Vadagaon Maval, District Pune, below




                                Page 3
PPN
                                                   32.APL-1958.26.DOC




Exhibit-210 in S. C. No.478 of 2022 as also the order dated 2

September, 2026 passed below Exhibit-217 in S.C. No.478 of 2022

are quashed and set aside.

9.    Learned cousnel for the Applicant states that the Applicant

will cross-examine the said witness Prashant Vilas Dongre as also

the Investigating Officer on the very same day.

10.   In view of the said contention, learned APP, on instructions,

states that on 9 October 2026, steps will be taken to see that PW 7-

Prashant Vilas Dongre and also the Investigating Officer remain

present before the learned Trial Court for conducting the cross

examination.

11.   Learned counsel appearing for the Applicant states that on

very day, cross-examination will be conducted of both these

witnesses and no adjournment will be sought.

12.   Accordingly the Application is disposed of in above terms.

13.   Learned Sessions Court is requested to do the needful so that

the trial will be concluded within the time granted by the Supreme

Court.



                                         [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]




                               Page 4
PPN