Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

VINOD LAXMAN GAIKWADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The bail application was dismissed.

Summary

Vinod Laxman Gaikwad filed a bail application before the Bombay High Court. The applicant was represented by advocates Vipul Dushing, Tanmay Kate and Ashraf Kazzi, while the State of Maharashtra was represented by Yogesh Nakhwa and Respondent No.2 by Harshwardhan Patil. After hearing the parties, the applicant’s counsel sought to withdraw the bail application, reserving the right to approach the court later. The Court considered the request and, while granting liberty to approach again, dismissed the bail application. The matter was disposed without any order of release.

Issues considered

  • Bail should be granted to the applicant?

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • High Court
  • application dismissal

Judgment

                                                                                             46-ba-1002-26.doc

       Urmila Ingale

                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
            Digitally signed
            by URMILA
                                                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
 URMILA     PRAMOD
            INGALE
 PRAMOD     Date:
 INGALE     2026.08.20
            11:21:36
            +0530                             BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1002 OF 2026

                               Vinod Laxman Gaikwad                                   .. Applicant
                                          Versus
                               The State of Maharashtra and anr.                      .. Respondents

                                                          ....................
                                Mr. Vipul Dushing a/w Mr. Tanmay Kate and Mr. Ashraf Kazzi,
                                 Advocates for Applicant.
                                Mr. Harshwardhan Patil – Appointed Advocate (through VC), for
                                 Respondent No.2.
                                Mr. Yogesh Nakhwa, APP for Respondent-State.
                                                            ...................

                                                           CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                                           DATE          : AUGUST 19, 2026
                               P.C.:

                               1.       Heard Mr. Dushing, learned Advocate for Applicant, Mr.

                               Nakhwa, learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Patil, learned

                               Advocate for the Respondent No.2 appointed through legal aid and


                               2.       After hearing Mr. Dushing, equally Mr. Nakhwa and Mr. Patil

                               and expressing my mind, Mr. Dushing would persuade the Court to

                               allow the Applicant to withdraw the present Application reserving the

                               leave and liberty to approach the Court in accordance with law.


                               3.       Reserving that leave and liberty, Bail Application is

                               dismissed.




Urmila Ingale                                                               [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

                                                                                                       1 of 1


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.