Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19691 (BOM)

NANDA NANASAHEB GAIKWAD v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

WP/60/2026 · 2026-10-15

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1-WP (CRI.)-60-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.60 OF 2026 Nanda Nanasaheb Gaikwad …Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Mr. Surel Shah, Senior Counsel a/w Sandeep S. Salunkhe, for the Petitioner. Mr. Amit Munde, APP, for the Respondent-State. API, Dhawale, Criminal Branch, Pune. CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 15th OCTOBER 2026 PC:- 1. Heard Mr. Shah, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Munde, learned APP for the Respondent-State. 2. By this Criminal Writ Petition, the challenge is to the order dated 10th July 2025 passed by learned Special Judge (MCOCA), Pune by which proclamation under Section 84 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”) has been issued against the Petitioner requiring to appear before the learned Special Judge (MCOCA), Pune on or before 30th August 2025. 3. However, Mr. Munde, learned APP, appearing for the Respondent-State, submits that this Court by order dated 12th Page 1 Akash 1-WP (CRI.)-60-2026.DOC September 2025 passed in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2496 of 2025 has rejected the Anticipatory Bail Application of the present Petitioner for the same crime and the said order has not been disclosed in this petition. Learned APP, more particularly points out that the Anticipatory Bail Application, inter alia is dismissed as the Applicant is absconding and that proclamation has been issued by the said order dated 10th July 2025. Apart from that various aspects have been taken into consideration including that provisions MCOCA Act have been invoked. Thus, order dated 12th September 2025 passed by this Court in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2496 of 2025 is very relevant and the same has not been disclosed in the petition. 4. Thus, it is very clear that the Petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands. 5. In view of the above circumstances, no case is made out for interference under extraordinary and discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and accordingly the Writ Petition is dismissed. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Page 2 Akash