Gtl Limited Through Milind Bapat v. Central Bureau Investigation And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3631 OF 2024 Gtl Limited Through Milind Bapat .. Petitioner
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.
.. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3632 OF 2024 Gtl Infrastructure Limited .. Petitioner
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.
.. Respondents Mr. Aabad Ponda, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Rohan Rajadhyaksha, Essaji Vahanvati, Sajal Yadav, Aparna Kulkarni, Prasad Lotlikar, Sonam Gupta, Apoorva Agrawal, Suyash Gadre, Shiva Pande i/by Harsh Ghangurde and Alathea Law LLP, Advocates for the Petitioner in Cri.WP/3631/2024.
Mr. D. P. Singh, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Rohan Rajadhyaksha, Essaji Vahanvati, Sajal Yadav, Aparna Kulkarni, Prasad Lotlikar, Sonam Gupta, Apoorva Agrawal, Suyash Gadre, Shiva Pande i/by Harsh Ghangurde and Alathea Law LLP, Advocates for the Petitioner in Cri.WP/3632/2024.
Mr. Kuldeep Patil a/w Mr. Anay S. Joshi, Advocates for Respondent No.1 in both matters.
Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, I/c Public Prosecutor a/w Mr. S. V. Gavand, APP for Respondent No.2 in both matters.
...
CORAM : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 10th NOVEMBER 2025.
P.C. :
It was on 27th January 2025 that the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed the following direction in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No.56845 of 2024: - "8.
Subject to the above directions, we permit the CBI to continue with the investigation but not to file the charge sheet without the leave of the High Court or until and unless, the writ petition itself is decided. It is understood that if the respondent cooperate and participate in the investigation, no coercive action shall be taken against him, subject to any further order that may be passed by the High Court." 2.
To recapitulate, by an order dated 6th September 2024 in Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 3631 of 2024 and 3632 of 2024, the High Court admitted the matters and stayed further proceedings in connection to the FIR lodged by the Central Bureau of Investigation (in short, CBI). The stand taken by the petitioners before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was that if the writ petitions remain pending in the High Court and the investigation is also stalled, it would cause serious prejudice to the CBI. Taking note of such a submission, the Hon'ble Supreme Court gave a liberty to the CBI to move an application for modification or stay vacation and that was to be considered expeditiously if it was not possible to decide the writ petitions.
3.
Just to indicate, no application for modification or stay vacation has been filed by the CBI. Proceedings in these writ petitions indicate that the writ petitions were listed on several occasions but could not be taken up for final hearing for one reason or the other. One of the reasons why these writ petitions could not be decided after the aforementioned direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is that the parties started filing affidavits in the form of rejoinder, sur-rejoinder etc. and on some occasions hearing of the writ petitions was deferred
on a joint request made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties.
4.
It further appears that one of the Hon'ble Judges hearing the writ petitions expressed disinclination to hear the writ petitions and recused himself/herself on 13th February 2025 and 3rd March 2025. The order dated 16th July 2025 indicates that the learned senior counsels for the petitioners assured the Court that they would take 45 minutes each to argue the matter.
5.
Mr. Kuldeep Patil, the learned counsel appearing for the CBI states that the pleadings are complete.
6.
Post the matters on 26th November 2025 under the heading "Supreme Court Expedited Matters".
7.
List of dates, written submissions etc. to be filed by JAYANT VISHWANATH SALUNKE 24th November 2025, copies thereof shall be supplied to the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
JAYANT VISHWANATH SALUNKE Date: 2025.11.11 12:09:16 +0530 [GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]