Bombay High Court

ANIKET JALINDER UMBAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The interim application is dismissed.

Summary

The Bombay High Court, Kolhapur Circuit Bench, heard an interim application filed by the applicant, Aniket Jalinder Umbare, in Writ Petition No. 4641 of 2025. The applicant argued that the Special Public Prosecutor was no longer present after the order dated 3 December 2025, and therefore sought further relief. The Court examined the contention and found no merit to entertain the interim application. It held that any further procedural steps should be taken by filing an appropriate application before the trial court, which can then decide without being bound by the earlier order. Consequently, the Court rejected the interim application and disposed of it.

Issues considered

Whether the interim application filed by the applicant should be entertained despite the alleged absence of the Special Public Prosecutor.

Subjects

interim application
criminal appellate side
procedural relief
Special Public Prosecutor
High Court

Judgment

                                                                  1-ia 246-26.doc

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE

                   INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 246 OF 2026
                                   IN
                      WRIT PETITION NO. 4641 OF 2025

Aniket Jalinder Umbare                                       … Applicant
        Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                               ... Respondents

                         __________________________

Mr. P. M. Arjunwadkar a/w. Mr. O. S. Shinde, Mr. Ritesh Raut and Mr. D. A.
Utture for the Applicant.
Mr. A. A. Naik, APP for the Respondent-State.
                       __________________________

                                  CORAM      : M. S. KARNIK AND
                                               AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.
                                  DATED      : 25th AUGUST, 2026.
                                  (Through Video Conferencing)

P.C. :

1.       We have heard learned counsel for the applicant.

2.       We see no reason to entertain the present Interim Application.

Hence, the same is rejected.

3.       It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that even

after the Order is passed, the Special PP is not remaining present. If that is

so, it is open for the applicant to file appropriate application before the

trial Court placing on record these subsequent events.

4.       On the basis of such an application if filed, it is open for the trial


 Amk                                                                     1/2
                                                        1-ia 246-26.doc

Court to pass appropriate orders on such application without being

influenced by the observations made in the Order dated 3 rd December,

2025.

5.      The Interim Application is disposed of.



(AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.)                          (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




 Amk                                                           2/2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…