4.BA.3300.2026.doc Ajay ININ THETHE HIGHHIGH COURTCOURT OFOF JUDICATUREJUDICATURE ATAT BOMBAYBOMBAY CRIMINALCRIMINAL APPELLATEAPPELLATE JURISDICTIONJURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3300 OF 2026 Mohd. Musum Sameed Ansari .. Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w. Mr. Yash Fadtare and Mr. Priyesh More, Advocates for Applicant.  Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent – State.  Mr. Prashant Sahebrao Diwate, Shirur Police Station present. ......…........... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : AUGUST 31, 2026. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Joshi, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Phad, learned APP for Respondent – State. 2. After this Court expressed its disinclination to the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Applicant, the learned Advocate persuaded the Court to keep the matter back for taking appropriate instructions. 3. The matter was called out for the second time and the learned Advocate for the Applicant persuaded the Court to allow the Applicant to withdraw the present Bail Application. 4. Needless to state that leave and liberty is granted to the Applicant to move a fresh Bail Application in future in accordance with law. 1 of 2 4.BA.3300.2026.doc 5. Bail Application is disposed as withdrawn. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Ajay Digitally signed by AJAY AJAY TRAMBAK TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.08.31 20:46:04 +0530 2 of 2

4.BA.3300.2026.doc Ajay ININ THETHE HIGHHIGH COURTCOURT OFOF JUDICATUREJUDICATURE ATAT BOMBAYBOMBAY CRIMINALCRIMINAL APPELLATEAPPELLATE JURISDICTIONJURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3300 OF 2026 Mohd. Musum Sameed Ansari .. Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w. Mr. Yash Fadtare and Mr. Priyesh More, Advocates for Applicant.  Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent – State.  Mr. Prashant Sahebrao Diwate, Shirur Police Station present. ......…........... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : AUGUST 31, 2026. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Joshi, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Phad, learned APP for Respondent – State. 2. After this Court expressed its disinclination to the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Applicant, the learned Advocate persuaded the Court to keep the matter back for taking appropriate instructions. 3. The matter was called out for the second time and the learned Advocate for the Applicant persuaded the Court to allow the Applicant to withdraw the present Bail Application. 4. Needless to state that leave and liberty is granted to the Applicant to move a fresh Bail Application in future in accordance with law. 1 of 2 4.BA.3300.2026.doc 5. Bail Application is disposed as withdrawn. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Ajay Digitally signed by AJAY AJAY TRAMBAK TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.08.31 20:46:04 +0530 2 of 2