Akriti Tyagi v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
2025:BHC-AS:55968
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6509 OF 2025 Akriti Tyagi ...
Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra and Anr.
...
Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6510 OF 2025 Akriti Tyagi ...
Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra and Anr.
...
Respondents Mr. Prashant Pandey with Mr. Dinesh Jadhwani, Ms. Ridhima Mangaonkar, Ms. Sumati Gupta i/by T.W.Three Legal LLP for Petitioner in both Petitions. Mrs. R.s.Tendulkar, APP for State in WP No.6509 of 2025. Mr. P.P.Malshe, APP for State in WP No.6510 of 2025. Mr. Ashish Shukla with Mr. Prachish Shukla, Mr. Rishabh Thakur, Mr. Aman singh, Ms. Anisha Mishra, for Respondent No.2 in WP No.6509 of 2025. Mr. Yogesh Patil with Mr. Prasad Nikam, Mr. Mansoor Tamboli, for Respondent No.2.
CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J.
DATE :
18 DECEMBER 2025 P.C.
1.
Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2.
The challenge in these Petitions is to orders dated 12 November 2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, MPID, whereby the learned Special Judge directed the Petitioner/Intervener to submit written notes of arguments in BA Nos.821 of 2025 and 829 of 2025.
3.
The Petitioners are aggrieved by the fact that the learned Special SSP 1/3
Judge declined to grant opportunity to address the Court. 4.
Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 - the accused, who have preferred those Bail Applications, submit that on account of the pendency of the intervention applications and the time sought by the Intervener to submit documents and advance arguments, hearing of the bail applications is getting delayed.
5.
If the Intervener / Petitioner claimed to be a victim of the alleged offences, she deserves an opportunity to address the Court, even at the stage of the bail application. (Jageet Singh and Ors. V/s. Ashish Mishra @ Monu and Anr.1).
6.
The Court is informed that the Bail Applications are listed before the learned Special Judge on 19 December 2025.
7.
The Petitioners are permitted to advance oral submissions before the learned Special Judge, in opposition to the prayer for bail. However, it is made clear that the Petitioners shall not seek any adjournment for advancing submissions. Nor the Petitioners shall seek time to file any document. 8.
Learned Special Judge is requested to hear and decide the Bail Applications as expeditiously as possible on the basis of the available material on record and the further material which the IO may produce before the learned Special Judge.
(2022) 9 SCC 321 SSP 2/3
9.
Writ Petitions stand disposed.
( N.J.JAMADAR, J. ) SSP 3/3 Signed by: S.S.Phadke Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 18/12/2025 14:49:05