Dismissed¶21

Deepak Sahebrao Nazarkar v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC16 Feb 2026IA/1005/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail — fresh bail plea via interim application from jail — reliance on Supreme Court judgment in Sou Moto Writ Petition (Criminal) No(s). 4 of 2021 — High Court bound by Supreme Court but cannot reconsider merits where first bail application already dismissed on merits — reconsideration would amount to review of earlier order, impermissible in law — appeal fixed for final hearing — Bombay High Court, R. M. Joshi, J., 16 February 2026 — Criminal Appeal No. 175 of 2023 — Deepak Sahebrao Nazarkar v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

What did the court decide?

None. Interim Application No. 1005 of 2025 dismissed and disposed of; appellant not enlarged on bail. At the request of learned Counsel for the appellant, the matter stood over to 5th March, 2026. ¶21

Deepak Sahebrao Nazarkar vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None. Interim Application No. 1005 of 2025 dismissed and disposed of; appellant not enlarged on bail. At the request of learned Counsel for the appellant, the matter stood over to 5th March, 2026.

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant/appellant, whose first bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court, can be enlarged on bail on the strength of the Supreme Court's judgment in Sou Moto Writ Petition (Criminal) No(s). 4 of 2021.

¶17

Court's answer

Though this Court is bound by the Supreme Court's judgment, where the appellant's first bail application has already been dismissed on merits, it is not open to the Court to reconsider the merits again at this stage, as that would amount to reviewing the earlier order, which is not permissible in law.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Since the appeal is already fixed for final hearing and learned counsel is unable to work out the matter, this is not a case where the Court is unable to take up the appeal for final hearing.

¶19

Key takeaways

Mr. R. R. Mishra, learned Appointed Advocate, stands discharged in view of the appearance of Mr. Sachin Salunke for the appellant.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (R. M. Joshi, J.), Criminal Appeal No. 175 of 2023 with Interim Application No. 1005 of 2025 (received from jail): appellant sought enlargement on bail pleading that the Court is bound by the Supreme Court's judgment in Sou Moto Writ Petition (Criminal) No(s). 4 of 2021. Held: while the Court is bound by the Supreme Court's judgment, the appellant's first bail application having already been dismissed by this Court on merits, it is not open to the Court to reconsider the merits again, as that would amount to reviewing the earlier order, which is not permissible in law; moreover, the appeal is already fixed for final hearing and counsel is unable to work out the matter, so this is not a case of the Court being unable to take up the appeal. Interim application dismissed and disposed of. Appointed Advocate R. R. Mishra discharged on appearance of Mr. Sachin Salunke for the appellant; matter stood over to 5th March, 2026.

¶1

61-APEAL-175-2023.DOC

¶2

Rekha Patil

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 175 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1005 OF 2025 IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 175 OF 2023

¶5

Deepak Sahebrao Nazarkar …Appellant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr …Respondents

¶6

Mr. Sachin Salunke , for the Appellant. Mr. R.R. Mishra , Appointed Advocate, for the Appellant present. Mr. Shailesh S. Ghag, APP , for the Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Suvarna Yadav, Appointed Advocate , for the Respondent No.2.

¶7

CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED: 16TH FEBRUARY 2026

¶8

PC:-

¶9

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1005 OF 2025

¶10

Mr. R. R. Mishra, learned Appointed Advocate seeks discharge. In view of the appearance of Mr. Sachin Salunke for the appellant, he stands discharged.

¶11

This application is received from the jail.

¶12

Learned Counsel for the applicant/appellant states that this Court is bound by the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

¶13

REKHA PRAKASH PATIL

¶14

Digitally signed by REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2026.02.17 11:54:15 +0530

¶15

Page 1 of 2

¶16

61-APEAL-175-2023.DOC

¶17

the case of Sou Moto Writ Petition (Criminal) No(s). 4 of 2021 and hence, the applicant/appellant be enlarged on bail.

¶18

There cannot be any dispute with regard to the fact that this is Court is bound by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, however, in the instant case admittedly the first bail application filed by the appellant has been dismissed by this Court on merits. It is, therefore, not open for this Court to reconsider the merit of the case again at this stage, which will amount to reviewing earlier order. This is not permissible in law.

¶19

Moreover, record indicates that the appeal is fixed for final hearing. Learned Counsel for the applicant/appellant is unable to work out the matter. Thus, this is not a case wherein Court is unable to take up appeal for final hearing.

¶20

In view of the same, there is no merit in the application.

¶21

Application stands dismissed and disposed of accordingly.

¶22

At the request of learned Counsel for the appellant, stand over to 5^th March, 2026.

¶23

(R. M. JOSHI, J.)

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Deepak Sahebrao Nazarkar v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Sahebrao Nazarkar v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Yusuf Ghasita Khan Alias Yusuf Usman Mansuri vs the State of Maharashtra

Shabbir Iqbal Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

United India Insurance Company Limited vs Manisha Bhausaheb Pawar and Ors.

Affak Aasif Sayyed vs State of Maharashtra

The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Mr. Arvind Shivpujan Giri and Ors.

The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Mr. Arvind Shivpujan Giri and Ors.