150-WP-4165-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.4165 OF 2026 Imran Hussain Khan …Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Ms. Apeksha Vora a/w. Mr. Sujit Mishra and Mr. Aniruddh Yadav, for the Petitioner. Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 25th AUGUST 2026 PC:- 1. Heard Ms. Vora, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Jadhav, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State. 2. By the present Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 29th June 2026 passed by the learned Additional Special Judge (MCOC), Thane, below Exhibits 323 and 324 in Special Case (MCOC) No.1 of 2016. 3. Ms. Vora, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that by the impugned order passed below Exhibit-323 Page 1 Sonali 150-WP-4165-2026.DOC and Exhibit-324, Applications seeking exemptions have been rejected and bail bonds of Accused No.1-Mahendra Jayprakash Sing and Accused No.3-Imran Husain Khan were cancelled due to their absence. 4. The learned Trial Court while passing the impugned order has observed that the case is 10 years old and High Court has expedited the case and therefore, due to the absence of accused, conducting a time bound matter is affected. 5. Ms. Vora, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that on 29th June 2026 there was heavy rainfall and therefore, the Applicant/Accused No.3- Imran Hussain Khan was stuck in traffic. 6. Ms. Vora, learned Counsel submits that the Petitioner will attend each and every date and completely co-operate for expeditious disposal of the said Special Case (MCOC) No.1 of 2016. She points out the statements made in paragraph Nos.6, 7 and 8 of the Writ Petition. The said paragraphs are reproduced hereinbelow: Page 2 Sonali 150-WP-4165-2026.DOC “6.The Petitioner respectfully submits that after grant of bail on 17.05.2023, the matter has remained pending before the learned Special Court for more than two years and eight months, and has been listed more than 52 occasions, spanning a period of approximately 2 years, 11 months. 7. The Petitioner respectfully submits that throughout the pendency of the trial, he has remained substantially/precisely complied with the directions issued by the learned Trial Court. The Roznama demonstrates that the Petitioner remained present before the Court on all the occasions, except on few occasions, exemption applications were moved on behalf of the Petitioner owing to unavoidable circumstances, including medical and other genuine difficulties. 8. The Petitioner submits that the aforesaid attendance record clearly establishes that he has never adopted any dilatory tactics not intentionally delayed the proceedings. On the contrary, he has consistently cooperated with the learned Trial Court in the expeditious disposal of the case.” 7. In view of the above circumstances, Ms. Vora, learned Counsel states that the Petitioner has never avoided the trial and on instructions, she states that the Petitioner will attend each and every date of the trial. The said statements are accepted as undertakings given to this Court. Page 3 Sonali 150-WP-4165-2026.DOC 8. Accordingly, by accepting the statement that the Petitioner will attend each and every date before the learned Trial Court and completely co-operate in the disposal of the said Special Case (MCOC) No.1 of 2016, the impugned order dated 29th June 2026 passed by the learned Additional Special Judge (MCOC) No.1 of 2016 passed below Exhibits-323 and 324 in Special Case (MCOC) No.1 of 2016 is quashed and set aside. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Page 4 Sonali SONALI MILIND PATIL Digitally signed by SONALI MILIND PATIL Date: 2026.08.25 17:54:57 +0530