Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Sachin Ramesh Patil vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 February, 2026
1
ITEM NO.55 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No.4899/2026
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 16-10-2025
in CRLA(BA) No. 111/2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Bombay at Nagpur]
SACHIN RAMESH PATIL Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondent(s)
IA No. 62279/2026 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP, IA
No. 62277/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
AND IA No. 62278/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 25-02-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Shreeyash Uday Lalit, Adv.
Mr. Mir Nagmans, Adv.
Mr. Himanshu Vats, Adv.
Mr. Angad Pahal, Adv.
Mr. Lavam Tyagi, Adv.
Ms. Ishita Khurana, Adv.
Mr. Aviral Kumar Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Ishaan George, AOR
Mr. Santosh Kumar Prasad, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.
Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv.
Ms. Chitransha Singh Sikarwar, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Signature Not Verified
1.
Digitally signed by
ANITA MALHOTRA
Date: 2026.02.26
Delay condoned.
13:06:48 IST
Reason:
2. Exemption Applications are allowed.
3. The petitioner has been denied regular bail in connection with
Crime No.50 of 2023 registered with Koradi Police Station, Tahsil
2
and Distt. Nagpur, for the offence punishable under Sections 370,
369, 109, 198, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, the “IPC”) respectively,
Sections 75 and 81 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 respectively and Sections 3(l)(ii), 3(2), 3(4)
and 4 of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (for
short “MCOC Act“) respectively.
4. We heard Mr. Shreeyash Uday Lalit, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, the
learned counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra.
5. Prima facie, this appears to be a case of child trafficking as
alleged.
6. We are not inclined to exercise our discretion in favour of
the petitioner, more particularly, keeping in mind that there are
four identical cases against him. However, we should also not
overlook the fact that it has been two years that the petitioner is
in jail and till this date, the Trial Court has not proceeded to
frame charge.
7. We direct the Trial Court to proceed with the framing of the
charge and thereafter start with the recording of oral evidence at
the earliest.
8. With the aforesaid, the Special Leave Petition stands disposed
of.
9. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(VISHAL ANAND) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
