Bombay High Court
ANKUSH TUKARAM JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- Disposed off as Withdrawn
Holding
The bail application was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the applicant to file a fresh bail application before the Trial Court if the prosecution fails to examine the remaining witnesses within six months from 13.10.2026.
Summary
The applicant, Ankush Tukaram Jadhav, filed a bail application before the Bombay High Court, Kolhapur Bench, in connection with Crime No. 484/2023 of Pandharpur Gramin Police Station, registered for offences under Sections 302, 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4/25 of the Arms Act, and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. The chargesheet had been filed and the case was numbered as Sessions Case No. 13/2024, pending before the Additional Sessions Judge (Extra Joint Court), Pandharpur. The applicant's counsel stated that the trial was proceeding and that 13 witnesses had been examined. The learned APP for the State stated that the prosecution would endeavour to complete the examination of all prosecution witnesses within six months from the next date, 13.10.2026. The applicant's counsel then sought leave to withdraw the bail application with liberty to file a fresh bail application before the Trial Court if the prosecution failed to complete the remaining witnesses within six months. This request was not opposed by the State or the original complainant/Respondent No. 3. The Court granted leave to withdraw, disposed of the bail application as withdrawn, directed the prosecution to act on its statement, and gave liberty to the applicant to renew the bail request before the Trial Court if the remaining witnesses were not examined within six months, with any fresh bail application to be considered on its own merits.
Issues considered
- Whether leave to withdraw the bail application with liberty to file a fresh bail application before the Trial Court should be granted in view of the prosecution's statement to complete examination of remaining witnesses within six months.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 4
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302, 307, 34
- Maharashtra Police Act — s. 135
Subjects
- Bail
- Withdrawal of bail application
- Liberty to file fresh bail application
- Speedy trial
- Examination of witnesses
- Sessions trial
- Indian Penal Code
- Arms Act
- Maharashtra Police Act
Judgment
26-BA-443-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 443 OF 2026
Ankush Tukaram Jadhav ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra And Ors. ...Respondents
_______________________________________________________________
Mr. Siddhant Deshpande i/b Abhishek Avachat, Advocate for the
Applicant (through VC).
Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for the Respondent – State.
Mr. Laxman Kalel, Advocate for the Original Complainant / Respondent
No. 3.
_______________________________________________________________
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 6th October, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant,
Mr. N. B. Patil, learned APP for the Respondent – State and Mr. Laxman
Kalel, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.
2. By the present Application, the Applicant has sought for the
following substantive relief in terms of prayer clause (A) :-
(A) He may be released on bail in connection with
Crime Registration No: 484/2023 of Pandharpur Gramin
Police station (Dist.- Solapur), registered for offences
punishable U/sec's 302. 307 r/w 34 of The Indian Penal
Code. 1860 and, Sections 4/25 of the Arms Act and Section
135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, and in respect of which
chargesheet is filed and case being numbered as Sessions case
13/2024, pending on the file of Ld. Additional Sessions Judge
Arjun 1
26-BA-443-2026.doc
(Extra Joint Court), Pandharpur.
3. Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant
states that the trial in Sessions Case No. 13 of 2024 is proceeding before
the Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur. He, on instructions, submits
that as of date, 13 witnesses have been examined.
4. Mr. N. B. Patil, learned APP for the Respondent – State, on
instructions, submits that the prosecution will make an endeavor to
complete the examination of all the prosecution witnesses within 6
months from the next date i.e. 13.10.2026, fixed in Sessions Case No.
13 of 2024.
5. In view of the above, Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate
for the Applicant, on instructions from the Applicant, seeks leave to
withdraw the present Bail Application with liberty to file a fresh Bail
Application before the Trial Court, in the event the prosecution is
unable to complete examination of the remaining witness within a
period of 6 months from 13.10.2026.
6. The request made by Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate
for the Applicant, is not opposed by Mr. N. B. Patil, learned APP for the
Respondent – State and Mr. Laxman Kalel, learned Advocate for the
Arjun 2
26-BA-443-2026.doc
Respondent No. 3.
7. In view of the statement made by Mr. Siddhant Deshpande,
learned Advocate for the Applicant, leave is granted to withdraw the
present Bail Application with liberty as prayed.
8. The prosecution to take note of the statement made by Mr. N. B.
Patil, learned APP for the Respondent – State and act accordingly. In the
event the prosecution is unable to examine the remaining witnesses
within a period of 6 months from 13.10.2026, then the Applicant is at
liberty to renew his request for Bail before the Trial Court.
9. If a fresh Bail Application is filed before the Trial Court in the
above eventuality, same be considered on its own merits in accordance
with law.
10. Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant
states that the Applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of
the Sessions Case No. 13 of 2024.
11. Bail Application No. 443 of 2026 is disposed of as withdrawn.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Digitally
signed by
ARJUN
ARJUN KRISHNA
KRISHNA RODGE
RODGE Date:
2026.10.08
14:34:36 Arjun 3
+0530
Checking your session…