Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Mithun Sham Pendhari vs The State Of Maharashtra on 15 January, 2026
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026
(@SLP(CRL.) NO. OF 2026)
(@SLP (CRL.) DIARY No.74946 of 2025)
MITHUN SHAM PENDHARI ..... APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..... RESPONDENT
O R D E R
1. Heard.
2. Delay condoned.
3. Leave granted.
4. A complaint came to be lodged by Shubham Ranjit Mishra alleging that he alongwith his friends had proceeded to Dattani Mall, Vasai after being called by Amit Shyam Pendhari for a party and discussion. Later on, they had dinner at Pankhafast Club and after dinner, there was a dispute with regard to the payment of bill which resulted in some of the accused assaulting the complainant and his friend Udit Singh 1 Signature Not Verified SLP (CRL.) DIARY No.74946 of 2025 Digitally signed by RASHI GUPTA Date: 2026.01.20 17:37:33 IST Reason: outside the club.
5. The said altercations seems to have escalated and at 02:00 am at instigation of Shyam Pendari, the present appellant is said to have attacked the de facto complainant by assaulting him on his head with a sharp knife and another person is said to have hit on the head of the complainant with a beer bottle.
6. On being shifted to a nearby hospital for being treated, the Doctor had treated him and opined the injury as ‘non grievous’. In fact, the police investigation note whereunder it is observed that the wounds are grievous injury opined by Mr. Simab Mushir on behalf of Greenlife Multispeciality Hospital, and they have no right to issue such an injury certificate. In fact, it is in the opinion of the treating doctor viz. the doctor who treated the injured complainant and in his certificate he has opined injury sustained by the complainant as non grievous.
2 SLP (CRL.) DIARY No.74946 of 2025
7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent would vehemently oppose the bail being granted in favour of appellant by contending that he was absconding and serious allegations are made against the appellant which require to be investigated and as such the chargesheet has not been filed till date against the appellant.
8. In the light of the aforestated facts and also taking into consideration that the altercation has taken place amongst the so called friends, we are of the considered view that appellant can be put on strict terms to allay any apprehension of the prosecution and release him on anticipatory bail.
9. Hence, appeal is allowed and appellant is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail subject to the condition that appellant shall mark his attendance weekly on every Thursday between 10:00am to 01:00pm before the jurisdictional police till the conclusion of the trial and he shall also attend the trial on all the dates of hearing except when exempted for any justifiable reason by the learned trial Judge and also on 3 SLP (CRL.) DIARY No.74946 of 2025 such other conditions that the Investigating Officer (IO) may deem fit to impose while enlarging the appellant on anticipatory bail.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (ARAVIND KUMAR) ..................J. (PRASANNA B. VARALE) New Delhi;
January 15, 2026.
4 SLP (CRL.) DIARY No.74946 of 2025
ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.16 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(s). 74946/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 26- 09-2024 in ABA No. 2355/2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay] MITHUN SHAM PENDHARI Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondent(s) IA No. 11086/2026 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 11081/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 11084/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Date : 15-01-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE For Petitioner(s) :Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pardeep Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Parinav Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Mansi Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Nandani Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Krishna Kumar, Adv.
Dr. Mrs. Vipin Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) :
5 SLP (CRL.) DIARY No.74946 of 2025 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. Appeal is allowed in terms of the Signed Order placed on the file.
4. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(RASHI GUPTA) (AVGV RAMU) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 6 SLP (CRL.) DIARY No.74946 of 2025