Muzaffar Ali Abbas Ali Sayyad v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:26216 13-CrWP-1326-25.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1326 OF 2025 MUZAFFAR ALI ABBAS ALI SAYYAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Suraj P. Tiwari APP for Respondent No.1 : Ms. Saie S. Joshi ...

CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE : 22-09-2025 PER COURT:- 1.

Heard.

2.

In Regular Criminal Case No.101 of 2022, the petitioner is one of the witnesses, presented an application seeking stay to further recording of the evidence till decision in Application No.130 of 2025, for cancellation of bail granted to accused/respondents No.2 to 4, pending with this Court.

3.

The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhule, by order dated 20.08.2025, rejected the said application and declined to grant stay to the recording of the evidence. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner is before this Court. 4.

The pendency of proceeding seeking cancellation of bail granted to the accused itself, cannot be regarded as a valid ground to defer the hearing by the trial Court. Nevertheless, the

13-CrWP-1326-25.odt unjustified and unwarranted adjournment has impact of impairing the right of the person to have speedy trial, which is a constitutional right.

5.

As such, this Court does not find any error is committed by the trial Court, while rejecting the application presented by the petitioner. I am of the view that the petitioner is unable to point out patent error in the order rendered by the trial Court. 6.

Accordingly, the criminal writ petition stands dismissed. [SACHIN S. DESHMUKH] JUDGE rrd