Vasant Krushna Padadale vs The State Of Maharashtra

Heard Mr. Mohit Dalvi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, and Ms. Shubhangi N. Deshmukh, learned APP for the Respondent-State.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned Advocates for the respective parties, the petition is heard finally.

By the present petition, the Petitioner challenges the order dated 6^th December, 2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chiplun (“Trial Court”), whereby the Petitioner's application seeking cancellation of the non-bailable warrant issued against the Petitioner on 6^th December, 2025, was rejected.

The material facts relevant to the adjudication of this petition are that the Petitioner is an accused in Crime No.23 of 2020 registered with Guhagar Police Station, Ratnagiri, for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”). The Petitioner was granted Regular Bail by this Court on 11^th March, 2021, in Criminal Bail Application No. 1433 of 2020.

Mr. Mohit Dalvi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, submits that Crime No. 23 of 2020 has been registered as Sessions Case No. 97 of 2020, and the case is pending before the Trial Court.

Mr. Mohit Dalvi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, states that, due to the Petitioner's defaults in appearing before the Trial Court on the three dates fixed in Sessions Case No. 97 of 2020, a non-bailable warrant was issued against the Petitioner on 6^th December, 2025. He submits that the reasons for the Petitioner’s non-appearance on 6^th December, 2025 were as specifically set out in the application seeking cancellation of the non-bailable warrant. He submits that the Petitioner had no intention of abstaining from appearing in Sessions Case No. 97 of 2020. He further, on instructions from the Petitioner, makes a statement on behalf of the Petitioner that the Petitioner shall remain present before the learned Trial Court on each date fixed in Sessions Case No.97 of 2020.

Ms. Shubhangi N. Deshmukh, learned APP for the Respondent-State, submits that the Petitioner was bound to remain present before the Trial Court on the dates fixed in the matter and cannot offer untenable excuses for his non-appearances, more so when the offence charge against the Petitioner is in the nature of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”)

Perused the Record with the assistance of the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties.

On 23^rd December 2025, this Court had passed the following ad-interim order:-

Mr. Mohit Dalvi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner has been regularly appearing before the Trial Court since 23^rd December, 2025.

Though the grounds sought to be put forth by Mr. Mohit Dalvi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, for the Petitioner’s default in appearance/non-appearance before the Trial Court are not convincing, the Petitioner was granted Regular bail by this Court on 11^th March, 2021 on merits, and in view of the categorical statement made by Mr. Mohit Dalvi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, before this Court today that the Petitioner shall remain present before the Trial Court as and when the dates in Sessions Case No.97 of 2020 fixed a case of indulgence is made out.

Ms. Shubhangi N. Deshmukh, learned APP for the Respondent – State, submits that, as indulgence is being shown to the Petitioner, minimum costs of Rs. 20,000/- be imposed upon him for defaults in appearance, which have resulted in delay in the trial.

Mr. Mohit Dalvi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, on instructions, states that the Petitioner shall pay appropriate costs.

In view of the above and subject to the Petitioner paying costs of Rs.15,000/-, this petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Consequently, the order dated 6^th December, 2025, passed by the Trial Court in Sessions Case No. 97 of 2020, which issued a non-bailable warrant against the Petitioner, is quashed and set aside. Payment of the aforesaid costs shall be a condition precedent to giving effect to this order.

Petitioner shall deposit the costs in the following account:-.

Account Name : Zillha Pariviksha vs Anurakshan

Sanghatana Kolhapur,

Bank Name : Indian Overseas Bank,

Branch : Shivaji Peth Kolhapur,

IFSC Code : IOBA0001735,

Account No. : 173501000000405.

Email ID : [email protected]

Mr. Mohit Dalvi, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, on instructions, states that the Petitioner shall pay the costs of Rs.15,000/-within three (3) weeks from today and that a compliance affidavit, along with proof of payment, shall be filed in the Registry of this Court on or before 4^th September, 2026.

Criminal Writ Petition No. 4763 of 2025 is disposed of accordingly.