JAYESH S/O MOHANRAO KALE vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO., BANODA, DIST. AMRAVATI — APPP/1737/2026
Case under Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.pc). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 08th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM040170982026
Filing Number
APPP/5435/2026
Filing Date
27-May-2026
Registration No
APPP/1737/2026
Registration Date
27-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. Vyas
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. Vyas
Bench Type
Single
Category
CRIMINAL ( 9 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Decision Date
08-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 09-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JAYESH S/O MOHANRAO KALE
Adv. O.K. MASURKE,N. M. NANDANE,N. M. NANDANE, ,RAJAT ARUN BIRANWARE,RAJESH A. BAGDE,N. M. NANDANE
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO., BANODA, DIST. AMRAVATI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajnish R. VyasView PDF
The High Court dismissed Jayesh Kale's application seeking to set aside the Court's April 27, 2026 order permitting withdrawal of his anticipatory bail application. The Court found that while Kale claimed his previous counsel withdrew the application without authorization, he provided no evidence of action against the lawyer and failed to cite any legal provision for recalling the Court's order, rendering the application an abuse of process. Costs of Rs. 1,000 were imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-Jun-2026
—
-
27-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Raj D. WakodeView PDF
-
27-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. APPP/1737/2026
The High Court dismissed Jayesh Kale's application seeking to set aside the Court's April 27, 2026 order permitting withdrawal of his anticipatory bail application. The Court found that while Kale claimed his previous counsel withdrew the application without authorization, he provided no evidence of action against the lawyer and failed to cite any legal provision for recalling the Court's order, rendering the application an abuse of process. Costs of Rs. 1,000 were imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts