502-IA-1438-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1438 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3294 OF 2025 Talha Abbas Mukhi and Anr. … Petitioners/ Applicants Versus The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. … Respondents ---- Mr. Rahul Arote a/w Ms. Nikita Gawai, for the Applicant. Ms. Rajeshree Newton, APP for the Respondent – State. ------- CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 7th July, 2026. P.C. : 1. This Application is circulated pursuant to the praecipe dated 07.07.2026, same is marked with ‘X’ for identification. At the request of Mr. Rahul Arote, learned Advocate for the Applicant, this Application was ordered to be listed on ‘Production Board’. 2. By the present Application, the Applicants have sought for the following relief in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b) :- Vivekanand 1 502-IA-1438-2026.doc “a) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to condone the delay of 223 days in filing present Application. b) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to restore the Criminal Writ Petition No. 3294 of 2025 back to the file of this Hon’ble Court.” 3. Ms. Rajeshree Newton, learned APP for the Respondent/State, leaves the matter to the Court. 4. On 26.06.2026, the following order was passed :- “1) Issue notice to the Respondent No. 2, returnable on 14th August, 2025. 2) Learned Advocate for Petitioners is directed to supply spare copies of Petition in the Registry within a period of two weeks from today, failing which the Petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to this Court. 3) Perusal of FIR prima facie indicates that, Application of Section 109(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, to the present crime, is warranted. 4) Till the returnable date, the investigation of the crime to continue, however, the Investigating Agency shall not file charge-sheet without leave of this Court. 5) Stand over to 14th August, 2025.” 5. Due to the Applicants' failure to comply with the direction to furnish a spare copy, the order dated 26.06.2025, which was self- operative, took effect upon expiry of two weeks. Consequently, the Vivekanand 2 502-IA-1438-2026.doc Petition was dismissed. Apparently, the time limit set for furnishing the spare copy was in view of the ad-interim order referred to in para 4 of the order dated 26.06.2025. 6. Mr. Rahul Arote, learned Advocate for the Applicants, submits that the spare copy was not supplied to the Registry of this Court within the time due to an inadvertent mistake on the part of his office. He refers to statements made in paragraph No. 4 of this Application. 7. Considering that Mr Rahul Arote, learned Advocate for the Applicant, has accepted responsibility and that there are no malafides alleged against the Petitioner, I deem it fit and proper to condone the delay of 223 days in filing this Application by applying the guidelines in the case of ‘Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy’.1 The delay is therefore condoned. 8. For the reasons stated above, the order dated 26.06.2025 dismissing Criminal Writ Petition No. 3294 of 2025 is recalled. Criminal Writ Petition No. 3294 of 2025 is restored to file. 1 (2013) 12 SCC 649 Vivekanand 3 502-IA-1438-2026.doc 9. Ms. Rajeshree Newton, learned APP for the Respondent- State, submits that the Interim Order, as recorded in paragraph 4 of the order dated 26.06.2025, may not be continued unless and until Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 are heard in the matter. She justifies the said submission on the ground that the interim order dated 26.06.2025 was vacated in July 2025. 10. I find substance in the submissions made by Ms. Rajeshree Newton, learned APP for the Respondent-State. Accordingly, it is clarified that Criminal Writ Petition No. 3294 of 2025 is restored by this order. The Interim Order recorded in Paragraph No. 4 of the order dated 25.06.2025 is not continued and the prayer for interim reliefs will be considered after hearing Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 2. 11. Interim Application No. 1438 of 2026 is allowed on the above-said terms. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Vivekanand 4