Interim Protection to Continue for Sameer Dyandev Wankhede: Bombay HC frowns over repeated Adjournment Requests from CBI [Read Order]

Meanwhile, Wankhede retains his shield from coercive measures, at least until the High Court delivers its final verdict on the petition. The Bombay High Court on July 8, 2025, formally recorded its order in the case where former Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) officer Sameer Dyandev Wankhede sought protection from coercive action by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The Division Bench of Justices A.S. Gadkari and Rajesh S. Patil confirmed the ad‑interim relief from arrest that had been granted on May 19, 2023, and imposed a firm three‑month timeline for the CBI to complete its probe.

Senior Advocate Aabad Ponda, appearing for Wankhede, argued that the petitioner had already secured ad‑interim protection nearly two years ago and that further delays would cause prejudice. On behalf of the CBI, Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil, assisted by Ms. Sampada Patil, Mr. Dhavalsinh Patil and Mr. Yogesh Sukale, explained that India’s Solicitor General was briefed but unavailable on account of other commitments. Crucially, Mr. Patil assured the court that the investigation, registered on May 11, 2023, would conclude within three months of the hearing.

The Division Bench of Justices A.S. Gadkari and Rajesh Patil repeatedly pressed the CBI for a definitive timeline to complete its probe, expressing frustration at successive delays, asking if they plan to finish this investigation in 10 years or 20 years. Early in the hearing, the court queried why the FIR failed to name anyone under Section 8 of the PC Act (the alleged bribe‑giver), even as it designated Sameer Wankhede under Section 12 as an abettor. In the end, the bench upheld Wankhede’s interim protection in his petition seeking to quash the FIR.

Ms. Manisha Jagtap represented the NCB, and Mr. Vinod Chate, the Additional Public Prosecutor, stood for the State of Maharashtra. The court noted the CBI’s request for yet another adjournment, and Wankhede’s counsel highlighted that similar delays had already been conceded by the agency on previous dates.

Describing the questions raised in the petition as “arguable,” the bench admitted the writ petition for final consideration. It then “confirmed” the ad‑interim relief, thus extending Wankhede’s protection against any arrest or coercive action until the court decides the matter on its merits.

In a clear effort to prevent further “indefinite postponements,” the High Court accepted the CBI’s undertaking and directed the agency to complete its investigation by October 8, 2025. The order grants the CBI “liberty to circulate” the petition—meaning to progress the case to its next stage, only after the conclusion of the probe. No fixed date for the next hearing was set; instead, the matter will be listed once the CBI files its completion report.

With the investigative clock now formally tick­ing, the CBI faces a clearly defined timeline to conclude its work. Should the agency miss the October deadline, it risks revisiting petitions for further extension, though any such request will likely meet a less sympathetic bench.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates