30.cri.appeal.484.25.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.484 OF 2025 (Prakash @ Devidas @ Adve Mura Gawde Vs. State of Maharashtra) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. H.P. Lingayat, Advocate for the appellant. Mr A.R. Chutke, A.P.P. for the respondent/State. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 28, 2026. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant. 2. In this appeal, the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 07/11/2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Aheri rejecting the bail application of the present appellant. 3. Learned APP for the State has pointed out that the appellant has not mentioned about his criminal antecedents in the appeal memo. In reply, the State has specifically mentioned about the said criminal antecedents. After receipt of the copy of the said reply also there is no amendment made by the appellant to include the same in the appeal memo. He placed reliance on the various orders of the Hon’ble Apex Court i.e. Hemant Vs. The State of Madhya [Spl. Leave Petition (Cri) Diary No.42861/2025] , Satyam Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [Petition for Spl. Leave to Appeal (Crl.) 2026:BHC-NAG:11334-DB 30.cri.appeal.484.25.odt 2 No.2094/2026] and Criminal Bail Application No.2419/2025 (Nisar Beg Ajij Beg Vs. The State of Maharashtra) decided by this Court at Aurangabad Bench dated 17/01/2026 wherein by referring the earlier judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Munnesh Vs. State of U.P. [2025 SCC OnLine SC 1319] it is held that the petitioner in this case failed to disclose his past criminal antecedents while seeking the relief of bail, we are left with no option but to dismiss the special leave petition on that ground itself. 4. In view of the above observation of the Hon’ble Apex Court, we have shown our disinclination to entertain the appeal. 5. Learned Counsel for the appellant seeks withdrawal of the appeal with direction that the trial Court shall expedite the trial and shall dispose it of earliest by keeping on day to day basis. 6. Permission is granted to the appellant to withdraw the appeal and in view of the statement, considering that the appellant is in jail since the date of his arrest, i.e. 14/05/2023, and the trial is already commenced, two witnesses are already examined, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aheri, shall expedite the trial by keeping it on a day-to-day basis and dispose of it at the earliest. 30.cri.appeal.484.25.odt 3 7. With this direction, the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn. 8. Liberty is granted to the appellant to approach to this Court after six months if there is no substantial progress in the trial. (RAJ D. WAKODE , J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) *Divya Signed by: Mrs. Divya Baldwa Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 29/08/2026 17:19:17