Dharmendrakumar Devishankar Dubey vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2025)

Dharmendrakumar Devishankar Dubey vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to withdraw the criminal application and to file an appropriate application for cancellation of bail before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel, such application to be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant may pursue cancellation of the bail order before the learned Sessions Court (Panvel), in light of the Supreme Court's decision in State of Karnataka v. Vinay Rajshekharappa Kulkarni on the competence of the Sessions Court under Section 439(2) CrPC / Section 483(3) BNSS. +1 more

Court's answer

Leave granted to the Applicant to withdraw the criminal application, with liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail before the Sessions Court (Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel); any such application is to be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

Acting on the Supreme Court's ruling reproduced from paragraph 17 of State of Karnataka v. Vinay Rajshekharappa Kulkarni — that a Sessions Court is entitled to entertain an application under Section 439(2) of the CrPC, now Section 483(3) of the BNSS, for cancellation of bail on the ground of violation of bail conditions, even where bail was granted by a Constitutional Court — the Court permitted the Applicant to withdraw and pursue the remedy before the Sessions Court. The allegation of violation of bail conditions itself was not adjudicated.obiter¶¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.), Criminal Application No. 29 of 2024, decided 12th June, 2025 — Cancellation of bail — Applicant sought cancellation of the bail order dated 09.06.2023, below Exhibit-(1), passed by the learned Sessions Court at Panvel in Criminal Bail Application No.498 of 2023, releasing Respondent No.2 on bail in C.R. No.96 of 2023 (Kamothe Police Station, Navi Mumbai), alleging violation of bail conditions by Respondent No.2. Reliance placed on the Supreme Court's decision in State of Karnataka v. Vinay Rajshekharappa Kulkarni, SLP (Criminal) No.7865 of 2025, paragraph 17, wherein it was held that a Sessions Court is entitled to entertain an application under Section 439(2) of the CrPC (now Section 483(3) of the BNSS) seeking cancellation of bail on the grounds of violation of bail conditions imposed by it, notwithstanding that bail was granted by a Constitutional Court. The High Court granted leave to withdraw the application, with liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of bail before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel; any such application to be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law. Criminal Application disposed of in those terms; no finding returned on the alleged violation of bail conditions.

1-appln-29-2024.doc

Digitally signed byNIKITA KAILASDARADE Date: 2025.06.1220:58:07 +0530

Nikita

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.29 OF 2024

NIKITA KAILAS DARADE

Dharmendrakumar Devishankar Dubey … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents

Mr. Aayush Kedia for the Applicant.

Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the State.

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATED : 12^th JUNE, 2025

P.C.:

Heard Mr. Aayush Kedia learned Advocate for the Applicant and Ms. Veera Shinde, learned APP for the State.

By the present application, Applicant has sought for cancellation of the bail order dated 09.06.2023, below Exhibit-(1) passed by the learned Sessions Court at Panvel, in Criminal Bail Application No.498 of 2023 releasing the Respondent No.2 on bail in C.R. No.96 of 2023 registered with the Kamothe Police Station, Navi Mumbai.

Mr. Aayush Kedia, learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is seeking cancellation of bail order dated 09.06.2023 on the grounds of violation of the bail conditions by the Respondent No.2.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka

1

1-appln-29-2024.doc

Vs. Vinay Rajshekharappa Kulkarni¹ , in paragraph No.17 has held as under:

“17. The aforesaid position taken by the Learned Trial Court is not in consonance with the decision of this Court in Gurcharan Singh (Supra). More so in view of the fact that this Court directed the Respondent to be enlarged on regular bail on such conditions as the Learned Trial Court deemed appropriate, albeit illustratively listing down certain condition. In this context, the Learned Trial Court i.e., being a Court of Sessions was entitled to entertain an application under Section 439(2) of the CrPC (now 483(3) of the BNSS) seeking cancellation of bail on the grounds of violation of bail conditions imposed by it; notwithstanding the fact that bail was granted by a Constitutional Court.”

(Emphasis Supplied)

Mr. Aayush Kedia seeks leave to withdraw the present criminal application with liberty to file an appropriate application before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Panvel. Leave as prayed for is granted, with liberty to file the application cancellation of bail before the Sessions Court. In the event of such application being filed, the same shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law.

The Criminal Application is disposed off in the above terms.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE. J.)

1 SLP (Criminal) No.7865 of 2025

2