Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2211 (BOM)

RAJESH NANA BHOIR @ RAJU BHOIR v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

APEAL/343/2026 · 2026-08-19

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 902-APEAL 343-26.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.343 OF 2026 Rajesh Nana Bhoir @ Raju Bhoir … Appellant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents ----- Mr. Sidheshwar N. Biradar a/w Dinesh R. Shinde, Omhari B. Fawade, Shahjahan V. for the Appellant. Mr. P. H. Gaikwad, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Darshana Kambli, appointed advocate for Respondent No.2. ASI K. M. Nalawade, Dombivali PS is present. Mr. Suraj N. Dhabale, Complainant is present. ----- CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 19TH AUGUST 2026 P.C. : 1. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that during the pendency of the present Appeal, the prosecution has filed chargesheet. 2. In that view of the matter, Learned Counsel for the Appellant seeks leave to withdraw the present Appeal with liberty to file regular bail application before the trial court/special court. Leave as sought is granted. 3. The Criminal Appeal is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as sought. 4. The Appellant shall not be arrested till the decision of the application if such application is filed within a period of two weeks from today. Mugdha 1 of 2 MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE Digitally signed by MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE Date: 2026.08.19 17:45:37 +0530 2 902-APEAL 343-26.doc 5. The trial court/special court shall treat the Appellant to be in a deemed custody for the purpose of deciding the application. 6. Needless to mention that the trial court shall decide the application on its own merits. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) Mugdha 2 of 2