Bombay High Court
USHA POPAT KATEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
- Bench
- ASHWIN D BHOBE
Holding
The Court allowed the original complainant to intervene in the bail application.
Summary
The Intervenor, Usha Popat Kate, who was the informant in the FIR (Crime No. 325 of 2021), filed an interim application seeking to be allowed to intervene in Bail Application No. 4566 of 2025 filed by the accused, Nanasaheb Shankarrao Gaikwad. The Intervenor argued that as the original complainant she had a vested interest in the bail proceedings. Both the accused’s counsel and the State’s counsel raised no objection to the intervention. The Court, noting the lack of objection, permitted the Intervenor to intervene and granted leave to amend the bail application to include her as an intervenor. The amendment was ordered to be effected forthwith, and the interim application was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether an original complainant/informant can be permitted to intervene in a criminal bail application.
Subjects
- bail
- intervention
- criminal procedure
- informant
- amendment
- interim application
Judgment
22-IA-1354-2026(iI).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
by GAYATRI
GAYATRI RAJENDRA
RAJENDRA SHIMPI
SHIMPI Date:
2026.07.02
21:37:48 +0530
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1354 OF 2026
IN
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4566 OF 2025
Usha Popat Kate … Applicant (Intervenor)
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Nanasaheb Shankarrao Gaikwad ...Applicant (Accused)
Versus
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent
---
Mr. Satish Maneshinde, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. P. K. Sanghrajka,
Ms. Lakshmi Raman & Suyash Mohan Garu i/b Mr. Ranjit Shinde,
for Applicant (Intervenor).
Mr. Sudeep Pasbola, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Sandeep Salunke,
Advocates for Applicant (Accused).
Mr. Raja Thakare Mr. V. B. Konde-deshmukh, APP for the
Respondent – State.
Mr. Narendra Patil – API, Chatushrungi Police Station, Pune.
---
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 2nd JULY, 2026
P.C. :
1. By the present Application, the Intervenor has sought
Gayatri shimpi 1
22-IA-1354-2026(iI).doc
for the following substantive reliefs in prayer clause (a) :-
“a) Allow the present Interim Application
and permit the Original Complainant/
Intervenor, being the Original Complainant,
to intervene in Criminal Bail Application
No. 4566 of 2025.”
2. Mr. Satish Maneshinde, learned Senior Advocate for
the Intervenor, submits that the Intervenor is seeking intervention
in Bail Application No. 4566 of 2025 on the ground that the
Intervenor is the Informant at whose instance Crime No. 325 of
2021 was registered.
3. Mr. Sudeep Pasbola, learned Senior Advocate for the
Applicant and Mr. Raja Thakare, learned ASG for the
Respondent/State, do not object for allowing this Interim
Application.
4. In view of the no objection given by the Mr. Sudeep
Pasbola, learned Senior Advocate for the Applicant and Mr. Raja
Thakare, learned ASG for the Respondent/State, this Application
is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
Gayatri shimpi 2
22-IA-1354-2026(iI).doc
5. Intervenor is permitted to intervene in Bail Application
No. 4566 of 2025.
6. Mr. Sudeep Pasbola, learned Senior Advocate for the
Applicant, submits that the Applicant will amend the Bail
Application by adding the Intervenor as Intervenor in Bail
Application No. 4566 of 2025. Leave to amend is granted. He
request for permission to carry out amendment forthwith.
Permission granted. Amendment be carried out forthwith.
7. Interim Application No. 1354 of 2026 is disposed of.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Gayatri shimpi 3
Checking your session…