927.ABA-2696.26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2696 OF 2026 Sunny Raosaheb Pagare … Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra & Anr. …. Respondents ______________________ Mr. Himanshu S. Gavit a/w Prasanna Nikam, for the Applicant. Ms. M. R. Tidke, APP for the Respondent-State. ______________________ CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 P. C. :- 1. Heard Mr. Gavit, learned counsel appearing for the Applicant and Ms. Tidke, learned APP, appearing for the State. 2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik Road by order dated 5 August 2026 while rejecting the Anticipatory Bail Application filed by the present Applicant has observed in paragraph no. 10 which reads as under: “10. It is pertinent to note that in Bail Application the antecedents are shown as 'N.A.' which indicates 'Not Applicable'. In affidavit the antecedents column kept blank. This court has tracked the record of the applicant on CIS system of Nashik-road and Nashik court. Surprisingly, this court found number of criminal antecedents of the accused. Page 1 PPN PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR Digitally signed by PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR Date: 2026.10.03 18:27:59 +0530 927.ABA-2696.26.DOC The applicant has deliberately suppressed the antecedents and thus there is non-compliance of mandate of Hon'ble Apex Court in that regard. Admittedly accused Sunny Raosaheb Pagare has number of antecedents.” (Emphasis added) 3. Thus, what is required to be noted that in the bail application filed before the learned Trial Court the Applicant has stated that as far as the antecedents are concerned, “N.A.” which indicates “Not Applicable” and in the affidavit, the column regarding antecedant is kept blank, thus indicating that there are no antecedents. However, learned Additional Sessions Judge himself traced the record of the Applicant on the CI system of Nashik Road and Nashik and found that there are number of criminal antecedents pertaining to the Accused. 4. In the above circumstances, it is required to be noted that in this Anticipatory Bail Application, it is stated in paragraph no. 32 as follows :- “32. That, the Applicant is having criminal antecedents but he is released on Bail in those offences.” 5. Thus, what is stated in the Anticipatory Bail Application that the Applicant is having criminal antecedents but he is released on Page 2 PPN 927.ABA-2696.26.DOC bail in those offences. Thus, no details whatever are given in the Anticipatory Bail Application. Even it is not mentioned that how many antecedents are there, no details of CR Nos., Sections under which the offences registered are disclosed. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Zeba Khan Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.1 has specifically stated that such type of application has to be dismissed as it is the duty of the Applicant to approach the Court with clean hands. Thus, accoridngly the Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed. 6. However in the interest of justice, liberty is granted to the Applicant to file a fresh Anticipatory Bail Application by giving all the particulars of the antecedents. 7. Accordingly, Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed, subject to above liberty. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] 1 2026 SCC OnLine SC 188 Page 3 PPN