Bombay High Court

VIVEK ALIAS BALU MHATARBA ALIAS MHATARDEO SHEDALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The anticipatory bail application is restored at the stage of its dismissal.

Summary

The applicant, Vivek alias Balu Mhatarba, filed a criminal application seeking restoration of his anticipatory bail (Application No. 101 of 2026) after it was dismissed for want of prosecution due to his non‑appearance on 1 July 2026. The applicant argued that dismissal would not benefit him and that he had provided sufficient reasons for his absence. The respondent State opposed the restoration. The court examined the prima facie reasons offered by the applicant and, in the interest of justice, allowed the restoration of the anticipatory bail at the stage of its dismissal. The matter was adjourned to 16 September 2026, with any interim relief to continue until the next hearing.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate remedy when an anticipatory bail application is dismissed for want of prosecution?
Whether the applicant has provided sufficient justification for his non‑appearance to warrant restoration of the bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
restoration
want of prosecution
criminal procedure
court discretion

Judgment

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

             CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3229 OF 2026
                       IN ABA/101/2026

            Vivek Alias Balu Mhatarba Alias Mhatardeo Shedale
                                 VERSUS
                  The State Of Maharashtra And Another

Mr. V. S. Wakale, Advocate for applicant
Mr. N. R. Dayama, APP for respondent-State

                                     CORAM        : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                     DATE         : 20th AUGUST, 2026

PER COURT :-


1.           Heard learned Counsel for both sides.


2.           Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant

would not have gained anything by allowing dismissal of the application

for want of prosecution. He, therefore, seeks restoration thereof.


3.           Learned APP opposed the application.


4.           Prima facie perusal of the application indicates that sufficient

reason has been put forth by the applicant for his non appearance before

this Court on 01.07.2026. In the interest of justice, application stands

allowed. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 101 of 2026 stands restored at

the stage of its dismissal.




914-Cri Appln-3229-2026.odt                                             1 of 2
5.            At the request of learned APP, stand over to 16.09.2026.


6.            Interim relief, if any, to continue till the next date of hearing.



                                                          (R. M. JOSHI, J.)

B. S. Joshi




914-Cri Appln-3229-2026.odt                                                2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…