969na1482-26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 969 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1482 OF 2026 Lakhan Kamlesh Pardeshi VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra ... Mr. Patil Vijay Bhalerao, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. S. V. Hange, APP for the Respondent-State CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. Dated : 2nd September, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant and learned APP for the State. 2. This Court, on 10.082026, had directed the learned Advocate to place on record the status of the trial. The learned Advocate informs that till date, the charges have not been framed. The learned APP submits that there are approximately 37 witnesses which are required to be examined. He further submits that the earlier order permitting withdrawal of the bail application of the present application as the court was not inclined to grant it on merit was passed on 10.02.2026 and the present application which is successive application has been filed within for months from the said date. The successive application does not have any change of circumstance, at least on merits. However, the pleadings indicate that it is on the ground of long incarceration. According to the learned APP, filing of the application 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AUG:40465 969na1482-26 within a period of four months after the earlier bail application was withdrawn as the court was not inclined to allow it on merit does not permit the applicant to file the successive application on the ground that the applicant is suffering long incarceration without trial. The learned Advocate for the applicant, however, submits that taking into consideration that the charges have not been framed, the application be considered. 3. Taking into consideration the arguments advanced by both sides, the contention of the learned APP, at least to some extent, can be accepted that the applicant cannot approach this Court within a period of four months on the ground of long incarceration. The applicant should have waited at least for one year from the date of filing of the application. However, the learned Advocate for the applicant submits that he may be permitted to file fresh application after a period of six months in case there is no sufficient progress in the trial. The learned Advocate seeks to withdraw the application with liberty to file a fresh application after a period of six months from today and also to expedite the trial. 4. Taking into consideration the entire submissions that has been canvassed, it will be appropriate if the applicant is granted liberty to file fresh application after 10.02.2027, in case there is no sufficient progress in the conduct of the trial. The expedition of the trial will not 2 of 3 969na1482-26 be appropriate for the reason that it is a matter of record that the trial courts are over burdened with work and there are other matters which are already lined up. However, the request is made to the learned Sessions Court that if at all its schedule permits, the present trial can be taken up and it may be proceeded in accordance with law. 5. With the above observations, the application stands disposed of as withdrawn. (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.) JPChavan 3 of 3