Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16281 (BOM)

ANKUSH TUKARAM JADHAV v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

BA/443/2026 · 2026-10-06

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

26-BA-443-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 443 OF 2026 Ankush Tukaram Jadhav ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra And Ors. ...Respondents _______________________________________________________________ Mr. Siddhant Deshpande i/b Abhishek Avachat, Advocate for the Applicant (through VC). Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for the Respondent – State. Mr. Laxman Kalel, Advocate for the Original Complainant / Respondent No. 3. _______________________________________________________________ CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 6th October, 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mr. N. B. Patil, learned APP for the Respondent – State and Mr. Laxman Kalel, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 3. 2. By the present Application, the Applicant has sought for the following substantive relief in terms of prayer clause (A) :- (A) He may be released on bail in connection with Crime Registration No: 484/2023 of Pandharpur Gramin Police station (Dist.- Solapur), registered for offences punishable U/sec's 302. 307 r/w 34 of The Indian Penal Code. 1860 and, Sections 4/25 of the Arms Act and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, and in respect of which chargesheet is filed and case being numbered as Sessions case 13/2024, pending on the file of Ld. Additional Sessions Judge Arjun 1 26-BA-443-2026.doc (Extra Joint Court), Pandharpur. 3. Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant states that the trial in Sessions Case No. 13 of 2024 is proceeding before the Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur. He, on instructions, submits that as of date, 13 witnesses have been examined. 4. Mr. N. B. Patil, learned APP for the Respondent – State, on instructions, submits that the prosecution will make an endeavor to complete the examination of all the prosecution witnesses within 6 months from the next date i.e. 13.10.2026, fixed in Sessions Case No. 13 of 2024. 5. In view of the above, Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant, on instructions from the Applicant, seeks leave to withdraw the present Bail Application with liberty to file a fresh Bail Application before the Trial Court, in the event the prosecution is unable to complete examination of the remaining witness within a period of 6 months from 13.10.2026. 6. The request made by Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant, is not opposed by Mr. N. B. Patil, learned APP for the Respondent – State and Mr. Laxman Kalel, learned Advocate for the Arjun 2 26-BA-443-2026.doc Respondent No. 3. 7. In view of the statement made by Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant, leave is granted to withdraw the present Bail Application with liberty as prayed. 8. The prosecution to take note of the statement made by Mr. N. B. Patil, learned APP for the Respondent – State and act accordingly. In the event the prosecution is unable to examine the remaining witnesses within a period of 6 months from 13.10.2026, then the Applicant is at liberty to renew his request for Bail before the Trial Court. 9. If a fresh Bail Application is filed before the Trial Court in the above eventuality, same be considered on its own merits in accordance with law. 10. Mr. Siddhant Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Applicant states that the Applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the Sessions Case No. 13 of 2024. 11. Bail Application No. 443 of 2026 is disposed of as withdrawn. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Arjun 3 ARJUN KRISHNA RODGE Digitally signed by ARJUN KRISHNA RODGE Date: 2026.10.08 14:34:36 +0530