Bombay High Court

YOGESH GORAKHNATH SHINDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: Allowed

Holding

The court allowed the original complainant to intervene in the anticipatory bail application.

Summary

The applicant, Yogesh Gorakhnath Shinde, filed an interim application seeking to allow the original complainant (intervenor) to intervene in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2832 of 2023. Neither the applicant nor his counsel appeared in court despite the case being listed as a prioritized matter. The intervenor’s counsel, Mr. Siddharth Karpe, asserted that the intervenor was the complainant in Crime No. 51 of 2023 and requested permission to intervene. The State’s counsel, Mr. S. H. Yadav, did not oppose the request, stating that the intervenor’s presence would assist the court. The bench, after considering the submission, found it fit and proper to permit the intervenor’s participation and allowed the application. Consequently, the interim application was disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the original complainant can be permitted to intervene in an anticipatory bail application

Subjects

anticipatory bail
intervention
criminal procedure
bail application
interim application

Judgment

                                                           17-IA-3754-2023.doc



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
               INTERIM APPPLICATION NO. 3754 OF 2023
                                IN
          ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2832 OF 2023

Yogesh Gorakhnath Shinde                                  ...Applicant
      IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Dipak Mohan Bhat And Anr.                                 ...Applicants
        Versus
The State of Maharashtra                                  ...Respondent
_______________________________________________________________
Mr. Siddharth Karpe, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. S. H. Yadav, APP for the Respondent – State.
_______________________________________________________________
                            CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
                             DATE : 30th September, 2026.
P.C. :


1.       Heard Mr. Siddharth Karpe, learned advocate for the Intervenor,

and Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned APP for the State.



2.       Neither the Applicant nor the Advocate for the Applicant are

present in Court either physically or through VC mode, despite these

proceedings being listed under the caption "Prioritized Cases."



3.       Mr. Siddharth Karpe, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states

that the Intervenor is the original Complainant in Crime No. 51 of 2023,

and therefore, he seeks intervention in Bail Application No. 2832 of


Arjun                             1
                                                                    17-IA-3754-2023.doc



         2023.



         4.      Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned APP for the Respondent - State, does

         not oppose the said request made by Mr. Siddharth Karpe, learned

         Advocate for the Applicant. He submits that the presence of the

         Intervenor would assist this Court.



         5.      In view of the statement made by Mr. Siddharth Karpe, that the

         Intervenor is the original complainant, I deem it fit and proper to allow

         this Application and permit the Intervenor to intervene in Anticipatory

         Bail Application No. 2832 of 2023. This Application is therefore allowed

         and the Applicant is permitted to intervene in Bail Application No.

         2832 of 2023.



         6.      Interim Application No. 3754 of 2023 is disposed of.



                                                       (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

        Digitally
        signed by
        ARJUN
ARJUN   KRISHNA
KRISHNA RODGE
RODGE   Date:
        2026.10.01
        21:23:45
        +0530




         Arjun                            2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…