Shubham Sanjay Mane v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Additional Chief Secretary Home Department Gov Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPW) NO. 35 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPW) NO. 34 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (WP) NO. 839 OF 2025 Shubham Sanjay Mane
Versus
State of Maharashtra through Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department Mantralaya, Mumbai and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Shri Mahesh Rai, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Doifode, APP for the respondents/State. CORAM :
ANIL L. PANSARE & NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.
DATED : 28th JANUARY, 2026.
The applicant/petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the order of detention dated 29.05.2025 passed by respondent No.2. 2.
During the pendency of the said petition, the matter was listed before this Court on 11.11.2025. Office objections were raised regarding illegible documents annexed to the petition. This Court granted seven working days' time to remove the office objections, failing which the petition was to stand dismissed without further reference to the Court. As the applicant/petitioner failed to remove the office objections within the stipulated period, the petition stood dismissed without further reference to the Court.
3.
The learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner submits that the applicant/petitioner is in judicial custody and was unaware of the status of the petition, and therefore, the restoration application could not be filed within the prescribed period of limitation. There is a delay of 32 days. It is submitted that the delay is neither intentional nor deliberate and that refusal to condone the delay would cause serious prejudice to the applicant/petitioner. He, therefore, prays for condonation of delay and restoration of the petition. 4.
Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application and submitted that the applicant/petitioner was not diligent in pursuing the matter and that no sufficient cause has been made out. He, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the application.
5.
Upon consideration of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is satisfied that the applicant/petitioner has demonstrated sufficient cause for not preferring the restoration application within the prescribed period of limitation. There is a delay of 32 days. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 32 days is condoned. The delay condonation application stands disposed of accordingly.
Criminal Application (APPW) No. 34 of 2026 1.
For the reasons stated in the application and in view of the order passed in the delay condonation application, Criminal Writ Petition No. 839 of 2025 is restored to its original file.
2.
The learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner undertakes to remove the office objections within seven working days from today, failing which the petition shall stand dismissed with costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), to be deposited in the Public Welfare Account.
3.
The criminal application stands disposed of.
Criminal Writ Petition No. 839 of 2025 Upon removal of the office objections, list the petition for further consideration in the week commencing from 16.02.2026. [JUDGE] [JUDGE] Signed by: Mr. S.K. NAIR Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 28/01/2026 18:05:35