10-REVN-460-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION. NO. 460 OF 2026 The Central Bureau Of Investigation, Anti-Corruption Branch, Mumbai. ...Applicant Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Rakesh Kumar Sinha 3. Narinder Rajput 4. Vinay Kumar Kantheti ...Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Mr. Anil C. Singh, Addl. Solicitor General along with Mr. Kuldeep Patil, SPP, Mr.Deepkumar Shrivastava (DLA-CBI), Mr. Limosin A. (ALA-CBI), Mr. Digvijay S. Kachare, Mr. Krishnakant Deshmukh, Ms. Saili Dhuru, Mr. Anay Joshi, Ms. Yukta Sawant, Mr. Sumitkumar Nimbalkar and Ms. Sanika Joshi, for Applicant. Mr. Balraj B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Anish Desai along with Mr. Chinmay Sawant, Advocates for Respondent No.2. Mr. Saurabh Ghag along with Ms. Akshum Thakur, Ms. Nikita Chavan, Mr. Siddhant Raul and Ms. Monali Gadhave i/b. Enact Legal, Advocates for Respondent No.3. Dr. Sujay Kantawala along with Mr. Pradeep CS, Mr. Rahul Agarwal, Ms. Jasmin Purani, Mr. Harsh P. Shah, Mr. Akshay Raj B.R., Ms. Aishwarya Kantawala , Ms. Ayushi Jha and Ms. Jeffry Caleb i/b. Rahul Agarwal Associates, , Advocate for Respondent No.4. ____________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER, 2026 NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Digitally signed by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date: 2026.09.16 18:38:09 +0530 10-REVN-460-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble P.C. : . After uploading the order, the learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 4 (for short “Respondents”) appeared before this court and requested that the operation of the order be stayed, as this court has directed to take Respondents into custody. The learned counsel for Respondents submit that the bail was granted to the Respondents by the learned Sessions Judge and they are on bail for last 19 days. They are ready to co-operate with the investigation. The learned counsel submit that as per view of the this Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation v/s. Sunil Bajranglal Varma & Anr.1 the order passed by this Court be stayed for a period of two weeks. 2. It is contention of the learned SPP that this court has passed the order and the same has been uploaded. The judgment in the case of Sunil Bajranglal Varma & Anr (Supra) was rendered in different circumstances and it will not be applicable to the present case. The Respondents were never taken into custody and their custodial interrogation is required, hence, it is not necessary to stay the order. 3. I have heard all learned counsel. 4. This Court has allowed the Revision Application filed by the CBI 1 Criminal Revision Application No.583 of 2024. 10-REVN-460-2026 (CR).doc N.S.Kamble and has granted two days’ CBI custody to the Respondents and directed the Investigating Officer to take the Respondents into custody. The Respondents were not taken into custody by the trial court and without taking them into custody, they were released on bail. In the case of Sunil Bajranglal Varma & Anr. (Supra), the Respondent was on interim bail, but in the present case, the Respondents were released on bail at the threshold. After this Court directing the Respondents to be taken into CBI custody and after uploading the order, stay cannot be granted. 5. The oral request is rejected. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)