Bombay High Court

BANDADADA @ RUDESH RAMESH SHINDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided: 2 February 2026
Disposal: Allowed
Bench: R M JOSHI

Holding

The court held that, in view of the appellant’s incarceration and the interest of justice, the application for condonation of delay must be allowed.

Summary

The appellant, Bandadada alias Rudesh Ramesh Shinde, who is in jail, filed an interim application seeking condonation of delay in filing his criminal appeal. The State of Maharashtra opposed the application. The court considered the appellant's curtailed liberty and the interest of justice. It found that the reasons for delay warranted relief. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay was allowed and the appeal was ordered to be registered. Notices were issued, but both respondents waived service of notice, and the matter was adjourned to a later date.

Issues considered

Whether the application for condonation of delay in filing the criminal appeal should be allowed?

Subjects

condonation of delay
criminal appeal
interim application
liberty
interest of justice
BOMBAY High Court

Judgment

                                                                11-CRAPEALST-24221-2025+.DOC




                                                                                      Shephali



                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                             CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO. 24221 OF 2025
                                             WITH
                              INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4450 OF 2025
                                               IN
                             CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO. 24221 OF 2025
                                             WITH
                              INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4451 OF 2025
                                               IN
                             CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO. 24221 OF 2025

                   Bandadada ALIAS Rudesh Ramesh Shinde                         …Appellant
                         Versus
                   The State of Maharashtra & Anr                            …Respondents
SHEPHALI
SANJAY
MORMARE
                   Ms Manisha Jadhav, i/b SK Kamble, for the Appellant.
Digitally signed
by SHEPHALI
SANJAY
                   Mr RM Pethe, APP, for Respondent No. 1-State.
MORMARE
Date: 2026.02.02   Mr Dhananjay Bhosle, for Respondent No. 2.
15:06:39 +0530




                                         CORAM:        R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                         DATED:        2ND FEBRUARY 2026
                   PC:-

                   1.     Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. Learned APP and
                   counsel for Respondent No. 2 opposes the application for
                   condonation of delay.

                   2.     For the reasons mentioned in the Application, also in view
                   of the fact that the liberty of the Appellant is curtailed since he is
                   in jail, the Application deserves to be allowed.




                                                  Page 1 of 2
                                           11-CRAPEALST-24221-2025+.DOC




3.    Hence, in the interest of justice, the Application is allowed
in terms of Prayer Clause (a).

4.    The Appeal be registered.

CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO. 24221 OF 2025:

5.    Issue notice to the Respondents.

6.    Learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of
Respondent No. 1-State.

7.    Mr Dhananjay Bhosle, learned Advocate waives service of
notice on behalf of Respondent No. 2.

8.    Stand over to 17th February 2026.




                                                    (R. M. JOSHI, J.)
                                                                        {




                             Page 2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…