Bombay High Court
APPLN/4141/2026 of SURAJ TATERAO JADHAV Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER on 9 October 2026
(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 904 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4141 OF 2026 IN REVNST/11218/2026 SURAJ TATERAO JADHAV VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ….. Mr V. H. Thorave, Advocate h/f Mr S. V. Jadhwar, Advocate for Applicant Mr M. A . Aher,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
904 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4141 OF 2026
IN REVNST/11218/2026
SURAJ TATERAO JADHAV
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
…..
Mr V. H. Thorave, Advocate h/f Mr S. V. Jadhwar, Advocate for Applicant Mr M. A. Aher, APP for Respondent No.1/State
…..
CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.
DATE : 09th OCTOBER, 2026
P. C. :
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4141 OF 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 439 days caused in preferring criminal revision application, thereby challenging the order dated 24/03/2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Nanded in Sessions Case No.219/2024, whereby the application of the applicant for discharge came to be rejected.
2. Mr Thorave, learned Advocate holding for Advocate Mr Jadhwar for applicant states there are strong grounds raised in the criminal revision application and the applicant has every hope of succeeding in the criminal revision application. He then submits that the delay in preferring revision application is neither intentional nor deliberate and is due to bona fide and unavoidable reasons. He, therefore prays for allowing the present application by condoning the delay.
3. Per contra, learned APP Mr Aher for respondent No.1/State strongly opposes the present criminal application on the ground that no proper explanation for delay is given by the applicant. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the same.
4. After going through the contents of the application and considering the reasons mentioned in the application, this Court is of the opinion that the delay for preferring the criminal revision has been properly explained and the application deserves to be allowed.
5. In view of above, this criminal application is allowed. Delay is condoned. Criminal Application is disposed of.
6. Criminal Revision Application be registered. CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (ST.) NO. 11218 OF 2026
7. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant.
8. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 30/10/2026.
9. Learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.1/State.
10. The concerned Police Station Officer is directed to file reply within a period of three weeks, failing which, he shall personally remain present before this Court. [SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.] sjk