Vinod Arun Zende v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR.

Shubhada S Kadam 42-IA-2859-2025 (CR).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2859 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.229 OF 2023 Vinod Arun Zende ... Applicant/s Appellant/s versus The State Of Maharashtra And Anr .... Respondent/s Mr. Ghansham Jadhav, Advocate for the Applicant/Appellant. Mr. C. D. Mali, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Adwait Bhonde, Appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.

DATE : 25th NOVEMBER 2025 P.C. :

1.

This application is for modification of the condition imposed by this Court while granting bail to the present appellant by order dated 30th November 2023. By the said order, his entry in Pune District was prevented except for attending court proceedings. 2.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that though first application for modification of condition is rejected by this Court by order dated 3rd December 2024, the Court has granted liberty to move fresh application after six months. It is his submission that there is no progress in the trial, which is causing inconvenience and harassment to the Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:

2025.11.26 10:07:38 +0530 appellant. It is his further submission that except for this appellant, all SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM accused are granted bail without imposing any conditions. 1/2

Shubhada S Kadam 42-IA-2859-2025 (CR).doc 3.

Learned APP vehemently opposed the application on the ground that material witnesses are yet to be examined. So also learned counsel for respondent No.2 opposed the application. 4.

This Court would have appreciated the concern of the learned APP, if there was any material to indicate that there is any chance of the present appellant causing interference in the evidence of the prosecution. There is no dispute about the fact that the appellant has no criminal history behind him. All the other accused are granted bail without any condition. In such circumstances, it was expected from the prosecution that the trial is concluded at the earliest. There seems no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future owing to the fact that there are number of accused persons and the application for recall of witnesses on behalf of other accused than the present appellant are filed. 5.

Having regard to the facts of the case and more particularly when there is no criminal history against the appellant, this Court finds no reason to reject the application. Hence, the following order : 1.

The application stands allowed.

2.

The condition imposed of prevention of entry of the appellant in Pune District stands revoked.

3.

The appellant,however, not to interfere in the evidence of prosecution in any manner whatsoever. The application stands disposed of in above terms. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) 2/2