Allowed

Anand Pravinchandra Shah v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC8 May 2026/1578/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an interim application seeking cancellation of a bailable warrant that had been issued against the applicant for non-appearance. The court accepted the applicant’s undertaking and the advocate’s affidavit regarding inadvertence.

What did the court decide?

The bailable warrant dated 24.03.2026 is cancelled. The applicant undertook to remain present on each date of the proceedings.

Anand Pravinchandra Shah Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

904-IA-1578-2026 (CR).doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1578 OF 2026 IN

¶4

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 242 OF 2015

¶5

SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN

¶6

Digitally signed by SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Date: 2026.05.08 17:12:51 +0530

¶7

Anand Pravinchandra Shah ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶8

¶9

Mr. Saurabh Nagarsheth a/w Ms. Swati Kapadia i/b Amit Kate for the Applicant.

¶10

Anand Pravinchandra Shah - Applicant present.

¶11

Ms. Manisha Tidke, APP for Respondent/State

¶12

¶13

CORAM : M. M. SATHAYE, J. DATE : 8^th MAY, 2026

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for Respondent-State.

¶16

This is an application filed by the Applicant praying that bailable warrant issued against the Applicant on 24.03.2026 be cancelled. On 24.03.2026, since nobody appeared for the Applicant in above Criminal Revision Application, bailable warrant was issued.

¶17

The Applicant is stated to be present in the Court, who is duly identified by Advocate for the Applicant.

¶18

It is stated in the application that the matter was listed after a lapse of many years and that he had suffered from heart ailment and was admitted in the hospital in November 2025 and he was never informed by the concerned Advocate about the said date.

¶19

Sneha Chavan

¶20

¶21

904-IA-1578-2026 (CR).doc

¶22

The Applicant in paragraph 6 has undertaken that he will remain present on each and every date of the Criminal Revision Application.

¶23

Learned Counsel for the Applicant has invited this Court’s attention to affidavit filed by the Advocate for the Applicant on 05.05.2026 stating that the due to shifting of his chamber/office, he could not contact the Applicant and inform about the date. It is submitted that due to inadvertence and personal difficulty of advocate, the bailable warrant got issued against the Applicant.

¶24

Considering the averments in the application, especially the undertaking given to the Court and affidavit of advocate, case is made out for cancellation of the bailable warrant.

¶25

The application is accordingly allowed. Bailable warrant dated 24.03.2026 is cancelled. The statement of the Applicant (in paragraph 6 of application) is accepted as undertaking to this Court.

¶26

(M. M. SATHAYE, J.)

¶27

Sneha Chavan

¶28

Anand Pravinchandra Shah v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Pravinchandra Shah v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases