Chandrakant Chaganlal Shah v. State Of Maharashtra

10-WP-5739-2025.DOC Arun Sankpal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5739 OF 2025 Chandrakant Chaganlal Shah ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra and Anr

...Respondents

Mr. Chandrakant C Shah, for the Petitioner-in-person. Smt. R. S. Tendulkar, APP, for the Respondent-State. Shri Dnyaneshkumar Ladse, Mulund Police Station present.

CORAM:

N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATE :

11th NOVEMBER 2025 ORDER:

1.

Heard Mr. Chandrakant Chaganlal Shah, the Petitioner in person and Smt. R. S. Tendulkar, the learned APP for the Respondents-State. 2.

The Petitioner is aggrieved by certain observations made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gr Mumbai, while releasing the ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Respondent on bail.

ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2025.11.12 11:25:16 +0530 3.

The Petitioner submitted that, the learned Additional Sessions Judge ought not to observed that, there was no intention on the part of the accused to cause hurt and the accused had no criminal record. 4.

Suffice to note the observations made in the order granting prearrest bail do not bear upon the final adjudication of the guilt or otherwise of the accused. Yet, to rule out the possibility of prejudice, it 1/2

10-WP-5739-2025.DOC is clarified that the jurisdictional Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations in the impugned order, at the subsequent stages of the case and trial, if held.

5.

Petition disposed.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 2/2