Allowed¶29

Rohit Sudhir Otari v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Jan 2025IA/568/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court interim applications IA 568/2024, 3529/2024, 3530/2024 in Criminal Bail Applications BA 320/2024, 1358/2024, 1471/2024; intervenor claiming to be complainant/informant permitted to intervene in bail applications of Amit Arun Shinde, Sahebrao Subrao Shelke and Balaso Krushnat Dhangar versus State of Maharashtra; no objection by applicants' counsel and APP Veera Shinde; intervenor's counsel Jayant Bardeskar; coram Ashwin D. Bhobe, J.; decided 15 July 2025; intervention applications allowed.

What did the court decide?

All three Interim Applications (Nos. 568, 3529 and 3530 of 2024) allowed; the Intervenor is permitted to intervene in Criminal Bail Application Nos. 320, 1358 and 1471 of 2024. ¶29

Rohit Sudhir Otari vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Digitally signed by ARUNA ARUNA SANDEEP SANDEEP TALWALKAR TALWALKAR Date: 2025.07.17 20:47:28 +0530

¶2

17.IA568.2024.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 568 OF 2024 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 320 OF 2024

¶6

Rohit Sudhir Otari	...Applicant
In the matter between
Amit Arun Shinde	...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra	...Respondent

¶7

WITH

¶8

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3529 OF 2024 IN

¶9

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1358 OF 2024

¶10

Rohit Sudhir Otari	...Applicant
In the matter between
Sahebrao Subrao Shelke	...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra	...Respondent

¶11

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3530 OF 2024 IN

¶12

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1471 OF 2024

¶13

Rohit Sudhir Otari	...Applicant
In the matter between
Balaso Krushnat Dhangar	...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra	...Respondent

Talwalkar

17.IA568.2024.odt

Mr. Jayant Bardeskar, learned Advocate for the Intervenor. Mr. Sanjeev P. Kadam, Sr. Advocate i/b. Mr. Bhalchandra Shinde, learned Advocate for the Applicant in BA/320/2024. Mr. Tushar N. Sonawane, Advocate for Applicant in BA/1358/2024. Mr. N. D. Patil, learned Advocate for the Applicant in BA/1471/2024.

¶18

Mr. Ramanik Pawar a/w Ms. Samiksha Pawar, Ms. Arti Bajpai and Mr. Ramnik Pawar a/w. Ms. Samiksha Pawar, Mr. Arati Bajpai, Ms. Dhanshree Jagdale, Mr. Samadhan Mahmulkar, Ms. Trupti Jambulkar, Mr. Rahul Gupta, Advocates for the Applicant in BA/4855/2024.

¶19

Ms. Veera Shinde, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.

¶20

¶21

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 15^th JULY, 2025.

¶22

P.C. :

¶23

Mr. Jayant Bardeshkar, learned Advocate for the Intervenor submits that the Intervenor has filed three intervention Applications in the respective Bail Applications on the ground that he is the Complainant/Informant.

¶24

Learned Advocates appearing for the Applicants in all the three Bail Applications do not object to the present Intervention Applications. Ms. Shinde, learned APP gives no objection for allowing the Intervention Applications.

¶25

In view of the no objections given by the parties and

Talwalkar

17.IA568.2024.odt

considering the statements made in the Applications, all the three Interim Applications are allowed and Intervenor is permitted to intervene in the Bail Applications.

¶30

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

¶31

¶32

Talwalkar

Rohit Sudhir Otari v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Sudhir Otari v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sonali Ganesh Chavan @ Ms. Sonali Satish Bhandare vs State of Maharashtra

Aasif Rafik Shaikh @ Aasif Momin vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Yuvraj Prakash Godase vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Umar Amirkhan Mulla vs State of Maharashtra

Amit Arun Shinde vs State of Maharashtra

Sahebrao Subrao Shelke vs State of Maharashtra