Bombay High Court
ANIL ALIAS ANANDRAO HANUMANT RUPNAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Disposal
- Disposed off as Withdrawn
Holding
The bail application was dismissed as withdrawn after the Court allowed the applicant to withdraw and refile a fresh application.
Summary
Anil @ Anandrao Hanumant Rupnawar applied for bail before the Bombay High Court. The State of Maharashtra objected, pointing out that the applicant’s disclosure affidavit omitted several criminal antecedents and cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Zeba Khan v. State of U.P. The applicant’s counsel admitted the omission and sought permission to withdraw the bail application and file a fresh one. The respondents did not oppose this request. The Court granted leave to withdraw the present application, directing the applicant to comply with legal requirements in any fresh filing. Consequently, Bail Application No. 658 of 2026 was dismissed as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether the bail application should be dismissed for failure to disclose all criminal antecedents in the affidavit
- Whether the applicant may be permitted to withdraw the bail application and refile a fresh application
Subjects
- bail
- criminal antecedents
- disclosure affidavit
- withdrawal
- fresh application
- high court
Judgment
907-BA-658-2026 (CR).docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 658 OF 2026
Anil @ Anandrao Hanumant Rupnawar …...Applicant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Anr …...Respondent
——————
Mr. Anand S. Patil for Applicant.
Dr. A.A. Takalkar, A.P.P. for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State.
Mr. Sachin M. Bhavar for the Respondent No.3.
——————
Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
Date : 30th September 2026.
PER COURT :
1. Heard Mr. Anand Patil, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Dr.
Takalkar, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State and Mr. Sachin
Bhawar, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.3.
2. Dr. Takalkar, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State, at the
outset submits that the Applicant has various criminal antecedents. She
submits that though the Intervener has filed a disclosure affidavit, the same
does not make reference to all the criminal antecedents of the Applicant. She
therefore, relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
osk 1 of 2
907-BA-658-2026 (CR).docx
of Zeba Khan V/s. State of U.P.1, submits that the present Application is liable
to be dismissed.
3. Mr. Sachin Bhawar, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.3,
endorses the submissions made by Dr. Takalkar, learned A.P.P. for the
Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State.
4. Faced with the aforesaid objection, Mr. Anand Patil, learned Advocate
for the Applicant, after admitting the error of not disclosing all the criminal
antecedents of the Applicant in the disclosure affidavit, seeks leave to
withdraw this Bail Application with liberty to file a fresh Bail Application in
accordance with law. This request of Mr. Anand Patil, learned Advocate for
the Applicant, is not opposed by Dr. Takalkar, learned A.P.P. for the
Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State as also by Mr. Sachin Bhawar, learned Advocate
for the Respondent No.3.
5. In view of the statement made by Mr. Anand Patil, 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 all the
requirements of law.
6. Criminal Bail Application No. 658 of 2026 is dismissed as withdrawn.
Digitally signed
by OMKAR
SHIVAHAR
OMKAR KUMBHAKARN
SHIVAHAR
KUMBHAKARN Date:
2026.09.30
20:42:11
+0530
[ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ]
1 2026 SCC OnLine SC 188
osk 2 of 2
Checking your session…