Bombay High Court
ROHAN ALIAS SUNIL CHANDANSHIVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- Disposed off as Withdrawn
Holding
The Court allowed the applicant to withdraw the bail application and dismissed it as withdrawn.
Summary
The applicant, Rohan alias Dingya Sunil Chandanshive, applied for bail in connection with FIR No. 0319 of 2023 for offences under IPC sections 302, 323, 504, 148, 149 and 34. The State and the complainant objected, contending that the applicant had failed to disclose several antecedents in the required affidavit, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Zeba Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh. The applicant’s counsel admitted the omission and requested permission to withdraw the bail application and file a fresh one with full disclosure. The respondents did not oppose the withdrawal. The Court, after noting the admission, granted leave to withdraw the present bail application and directed that a fresh application may be filed in compliance with the law. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether a bail application can be entertained when the applicant has omitted antecedent information in the disclosure affidavit.
- Whether the applicant may be permitted to withdraw the bail application and re‑file a fresh application after correcting the omission.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 148, 149, 302, 323, 34, 504
Subjects
- bail
- non‑disclosure
- antecedents
- IPC offences
- withdrawal of application
- criminal procedure
Judgment
1/3
922-BA-438-2026 (CR).DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.438 OF 2026
Rohan Alias Dingya Sunil Chandanshive ….Applicant
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra and Ors. ....Respondents
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Sachin K. Hande a/w Mr. Vishal K. Hande, for Applicant.
Mr. S. H. Yadav, A.P.P., for Respondent Nos.1 and 3 - State.
Mr. Unmesh Jamdar i/b Adv. C. R. Sonecha, for Respondent No.2
(Complainant).
_________________________________________________________________
Digitally
signed by
SHANTANU
SHANTANU SHANKARSA
SHANKARSA DHUDUM
DHUDUM Date:
2026.09.30
20:58:54
+0530
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 30th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C.
1. Heard Mr. Sachin K. Hande, learned Advocate for the Applicant,
Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 – State, and Mr.
Unmesh Jamdar, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
2. By the present Application, the Applicant has sought the
following substantive relief:
“(b) Enlarge the Applicant on bail in connection with FIR
No.0319 of 2023 dated 26/08/2023 registered with
Kavathemahankal Police Station, District Sangli, for the
Shantanu S. Dhudum
2/3
922-BA-438-2026 (CR).DOC
offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 504, 148,
149 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, on such
terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
and proper.”
3. At the outset, Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.
1 and 3 – State, and Mr. Unmesh Jamdar, learned Advocate for Respondent
No. 2, state that the Applicant has several antecedents to his credit, which
have not been disclosed by the Applicant in the disclosure Affidavit. They,
therefore, seek dismissal of the present Application in view of the decision
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zeba Khan Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh1.
4. Faced with the said objection, Mr. Sachin K. Hande, learned
Advocate for the Applicant by admitting the error of not mentioning all the
antecedents of the Applicant in the disclosure Affidavit on instructions,
seeks leave to withdraw the present Bail Application with liberty to file a
fresh Bail Application by disclosing all the antecedents of the Applicant.
5. The request for withdrawal of this Bail Application made by Mr.
Sachin K. Hande, learned Advocate for the Applicant, is not opposed by Mr.
S. H. Yadav, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 – State, and Mr.
Unmesh Jamdar, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
1 2026 SCC OnLine SC 188
Shantanu S. Dhudum
3/3
922-BA-438-2026 (CR).DOC
6. In view of the statement made by Mr. Sachin K. Hande, learned
Advocate for the Applicant, leave is granted to withdraw the present Bail
Application, with liberty to file a fresh Bail Application after complying
with the requirements of law.
7. Criminal Bail Application No.438 of 2026 is dismissed as
withdrawn.
( ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Shantanu S. Dhudum
Checking your session…