Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18096 (BOM)

VIDYADHAR BHUPAL MANGAVE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

IA/338/2026 · 2026-10-12

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

109 - CRI IA - 338 - 2026.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 338 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3379 OF 2023 Vidyadhar Bhupal Mangave … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Saurabh Tandale for the Applicant. Dr. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State. Mr. Mohan Chavan for Respondent No.2. CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATED : OCTOBER 12, 2026 P.C.: 1. By the present Application, the Applicant has sought the following substantive reliefs: “A. This Application for Cancellation of Bail may kindly be allowed; B. Cancel the bail granted to Respondent No.1/Accused in Bail Application No. 3379 of 2023 in connection with C.R. No. 589 of 2022 registered with Sangli Police Station kindly be directed to the surrender before the investigation authority and for that purpose issue necessary orders; C. This Hon’ble court kindly Direct the Investigating Officer / Concerned Police Station to take Respondent No.2 into custody forthwith upon cancellation of bail;” 2. Mr. Saurabh Tandale, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that during the pendency of this Interim Application, a non-bailable warrant was issued against the Respondent No.2 and the Respondent VRJ 1 VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Digitally signed by VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Date: 2026.10.12 19:58:56 +0530 109 - CRI IA - 338 - 2026.docx No.2 has been arrested. He, therefore, submits that the reliefs sought in this Application have become infructuous and that this Application be disposed of. 3. Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the State, endorses the submission made by Mr. Saurabh Tandale, learned Advocate for the Applicant, and submits that this Application is rendered infructuous. 4. Mr. Mohan Chavan, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2, states that Respondent No. 2 has been arrested upon execution of the non-bailable warrant issued by this Court. 5. In view of the aforesaid statements and the fact that Respondent No. 2 has been arrested during the pendency of this Interim Application, this Application is disposed of as infructuous. 6. Criminal Interim Application No. 338 of 2026 stands disposed of. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) VRJ 2