All Bail Application
Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 3rd June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. stand over to 26/06/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ….... Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for Applicant. Ms.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 14th JUNE, 2019 P.C. : Learned APP seeks time to take instructions regarding health condition of the Applicant. Time as prayed for is granted. Stand over to 28/06/2019. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Anand S Patil For Applicant A.A.Takalkar APP for State/Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 28th June, 2019 P.C. : Mentioned. At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 03/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 3rd July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 26/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Anand S Patil For Applicant S.H.Yadav APP for State/Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 11th July, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 25/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 25th July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 21/08/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 21st August, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned.Stand over to 11/09/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 11th September, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 07/10/2019 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 7th October, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 14/11/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 14th November, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 03/12/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Shekhar Ingawle i/b. Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. …... …... Mrs.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : DECEMBER 17, 2019. P.C. : Learned Counsel for the Applicant tendered medical certificate dated 10th December, 2019. Same is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. Learned APP seeks time to take instructions. Stand over to 6th January, 2020. To be listed High on Board. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Shekhar Ingawale i/b.Anand S Patil For Applicant A.A.Takalkar APP for State/respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 6th January, 2020 P.C. : Learned APP seeks time to take instructions. S.O. to 08/01/2020 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 30: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Shekhar Ingawle i/b. Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. …... …... Mrs.Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : JANUARY 08, 2020. P.C. : The applicant is seeking bail on medical ground for temporary period. The applicant is in custody from 10th March, 2016 in connection with C.R.No.31 of 2016, registered with Ajara Police Station, District–Kolhapur for the ofences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B and 201 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code ("IPC", for short). 2 The applicant had earlier preferred an application for bail viz. Criminal Bail Application No.1466 of 2018. By order dated 28th August, 2018, it was directed that the jail Authorities shall ensure that the applicant is taken to Chougule Neurology Centre and Nursing Home, Kolhapur, on the date and time given for the applicant's check up and examination and for follow-up, if required. It was also observed that the applicant cannot be given treatment for the ailment, which he is sufering in C.P.R. Hospital, Kolhapur or in any Government Hospital in Kolhapur. Applicant contend that he is sufering from Lumbar and Cervical Spondylosis. In pursuant to the said order, the applicant was taken to Chougule Nursing Home. Applicant relies upon the medical certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More, attached to Abhinav Nursing Home. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was examined at Chougule Nursing Home and thereafter he was referred to Orthopedic Surgeon Dr.Sanjay More, attached to Abhinav Nursing Home. The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More is produced in support of the submission that the applicant requires medical treatment and surgery, which can be performed in the private nursing home. 3 The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More mentions as follows: "This is to certify that I, the undersigned Dr.Sanjay More, have gone through the all medical reports of Mr.Amol Jayvant Pawar, 33/M, R/o. Kolhapur and referred by Dr. Sangram Chougule, Neuro Physician, Kolhapur. As he is not responding to medical line of treatment for chronic lumbar PID with Radiography, he has been advised endoscopic laminectomy and Discectomy by a team of Neurosurgeon, Orthopedic Sargon and Neuro physician as early as possible." 4 Learned APP has tendered the report of Dr.Sanjay Padhye, Medical Oficer, Kiolhapur Central Prison, Kalamba. The applicant is detained in the said jail. The said report dated 8th January, 2020 mentions that it's a report in continuation of earlier report. As per the orders of the High Court, the patient was sent to Dr.Sanjay More, MS (Ortho) D.N.R. (ortho), as per the opinion and referral request of Neurosurgeon Dr.Sangram Chougule. As per the evaluation done by them of the said patient he requires a surgical intervention to treat him. 5 The patient wants operation done in a private hospital and hence he has moved application. The patient has been evaluated by experts and also in private hospital as per the courts permission. The xerox copy of the report of the private doctor which has been referred to herein above are annexed with the report. The report dated 8th January, 2020, is taken on record and marked "X" for identifcation. The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More, tendered on the earlier occasion, is marked as "X-1", for identifcation. 5 Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that undisputedly, the treatment is not available in C.P.R. Hospital or any other Government Hospital in Kolhapur. The applicant is in custody for a period of four years. The applicant is required to undergo surgery immediately. With a view to undergo surgery and the follow-up treatment, applicant be granted bail. Learned APP relied upon the report tendered by the medical oficer, Kolhapur Central Prison. The report refers to the medical certifcate dated 10th December, 2019, issued by Dr.Sanjay More. The report confrms that the applicant has been examined by the experts. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant can be granted bail on medical ground for a period of three months. 6 Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: (i) Bail Application No.1412 of 2019, is allowed; (ii) The Applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.31 of 2016, registered with Ajara Police Station, District– Kolhapur, for the period of three months frin the date of release on medical ground on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall intimate to concerned police station the details of his place of residence, details about his hospitalization and further details about treatment or surgery undergone by him; (iv) Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence while on bail; (v) On completion of period of three months from the date of release, the applicant shall surrender before Ajara Police Station, District–Kolhapur; (vi) Bail Application stands disposed of. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Amol Jaywant Pawar
Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Aashish Satpute for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th January, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 29/01/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 29th January, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 07/02/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 7th February, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 01/03/2024 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 1st March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 15/03/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 19/03/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 19th March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 15/04/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Amit Icham for Applicant. Mr. Pandruang H. Gaikwad, APP for State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th April, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 06/05/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 6th May, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 01/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 1st July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 08/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 8th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 11/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Advait Tamhankar i/by Mr. Aashish Satpute for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State/Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 11th July, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 19/07/2024 ( at 2:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 27: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 19th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 23/08/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Chaitanya Purankar i/by Mr. Amit Icham for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State/Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 23rd August, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 13/09/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 33: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ] Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra ] Respondent Mr.Advait Tamhankar i/b Aashish Satpute for the Applicant. Ms.Sangita Phad, APP for the State. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J RESERVED ON : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 3rd OCTOBER, 2024. P.C. : 1 The Applicant/Accused in Crime No.6/2022 registered with Pune ATS, is seeking regular bail. 2 The aforesaid offence is made punishable under Section 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short "NDPS Act"). 3 The Applicant, on secret inputs was apprehended on 02.05.2022 after having found in possession of 118 Grams of Mephedrone costing around Rs.11,80,000/-. The seizure carried out in the investigation of the aforesaid offence, is of commercial quantity. 4 In the aforesaid backdrop, the learned counsel for the Applicant while seeking regular bail would urge that the Respondent/Investigating Officer has failed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. So as to substantiate the aforesaid contention, my attention is invited to the nature, the mode and manner in which the recovery was effected from the Applicant. The learned counsel would urge that since it is mandatory to follow the procedure laid down in the aforesaid provisions of the NDPS Act, the Applicant is entitled to be released on bail, as the recovery was neither effected by a Gazetted Officer, nor search. 5 The learned APP, while opposing the prayer for bail would urge that not only the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 50 read with 41 to 43 of the NDPS Act is complied with, but also the report of Chemical Analyser certifies the contraband seized from the Applicant, being banned substance. It is claimed that the Applicant is already charge-sheeted and there is enough iota of evidence to directly connect the Applicant to the crime. As such, it is urged that the Application is liable to be rejected. 2/4 6 Having appreciated the rival claims, it is appreciated that on specific inputs the Applicant was apprehended on 02.05.2022 at about 6.30 p.m. and he was sensitized about his right under Section 41, 42, 43 and 50. The written consent given by the Applicant for carrying out personal search by the Police Officer sufficiently speaks of compliance of the statutory mandate as provided under the NDPS Act. 7 Apart from above, the station diary entry was made about the offence and the same was immediately forwarded to the immediate superior by the Assistant Police Inspector. As such, there is compliance of Section 42, so also Section 50. 8 Apart from above, the quantity seized from the Applicant appears to be certified by the Chemical Analyser to be a banned substance under the NDPS Act. The said quantity is commercial in nature. In the aforesaid backdrop, prima-facie, no technical flaw could be noticed in the investigation against the Applicant. Perusal of the investigation papers depict that there is strong evidence available against the Applicant so as to infer his prima facie involvement in the offence in question and the offence being grave in nature, I see no reason to consider and grant the prayer for releasing the Applicant on bail. 9 Apart from above, the Courts below have consequently rejected his regular Bail Applications by recording the cogent reasons. In this background, the Application stands rejected. (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J)
1) Document Filed: Affidavit
Filed By : The State Of Maharashtra
Advocate: Through Pp
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 1: 25/01/2024
2) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Filed By : Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak
Advocate: Amit Icham
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 2: 12/03/2024
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak
Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1119 OF 2015 Shri Rohit Jaywant Mane Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil for the Applicant. Mr. Arfan Sait, A.P.P. for Respondent - State. Mr. M.V. Damase, HC/1797, Tasgaon Police Station, Dist. Sangli, present. CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED : JULY 31, 2015 P.C. :- 1 The application is moved for bail as the applicant/accused is facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2), (F), (I), (N), 366, 452, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5,(L), 6, & 8 of POCSO Act in C.R. No.255 of 2014 registered with Tasgaon Police Station, District Sangli. 2 It is the case of the prosecution that applicant/accused is paternal uncle of the prosecutrix, who is 16 years and 11 months old and school going girl. That on 9.10.2014 applicant/accused who is 27 years old, took her out culvert near a temple and raped her. Thereafter again on 3.11.2014 when she was alone in the house he raped her. He was arrested on 4.11.2014. Hence, this bail application. 3 Learned Counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that there is a discrepancy of her statement before the Medical officer and her statement recorded by the police. In the statement before the Medical officer, she did not say of the second incident of rape but she mentioned that attempt to rape on 3.11.2014. However, in the statement recorded by the police she had stated that second time also he has raped. The learned counsel submitted that it appears that she has given different versions and, therefore, benefit is to be given to the applicant/accused by releasing him on bail. 4 The learned prosecutor opposed the application. He relied on the medical certificate and her statement recorded before the police and the statement of her father. He submitted that prosecutrix was minor i.e. below 16 years old. 5 Perused all the papers, medical certificate in favour of case of the prosecutrix. Considering the contents in the F.I.R. and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded by the police, it is prima facie a case of rape. The applicant/accused is paternal uncle of the prosecutrix and prosecutrix is minor. In view of this it is not a case to grant bail. 6 The Bail Application is rejected. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Rohit Jaywant Mane
Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 594 OF 2021 …...... …...... Atul Hanumant Kale … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent None for the Applicant. Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the State. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 17 JANUARY 2023 P.C. :- . The Registry has received this application through jail. The notification which was issued to release under-trial prisoners on bail in view of Covid-19 pandemic has ceased to exist. The present application for bail on that ground thus does not survive and the same is disposed of. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Digitally signed by KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Date: 2023.01.17 18:21:02 +0530 Kanchan P Dhuri 1 / 1
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Atul Hanumant Kale
Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1279 OF 2018 Chetan Bhanudas Randhire ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Adv. Mayur D. Sapkale For Applicant Adv. A. A. TAkalkar APP for State CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J DATE : 4th July, 2018 P.C. : At the request of learned APP, Stand over to 11/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1279 OF 2018 Chetan Bhanudas Randhire ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Adv. Mayur D. Sapkale For Applicant Adv. A. A. Takalkar APP for State CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J DATE : 11th July, 2018 P.C. : Mentioned out of turn. Stand over to 18/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 11: BA.1279-2018.doc Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1279 OF 2018 CHETAN BHANUDAS RANDHIRE ..APPLICANT Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT Mr. M.D. Sapkale for applicant. Ms. A.A. Takalkar, APP for State. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 9th August 2018. P.C.: 1] This is an application under Section 439 of the Cr. P.C for bail in CR No.I216 of 2016 dated 6.12.2016 registered with Thanenagar Police Station, Thane now transferred under sections 420, 181, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 of the Indian Penal Code. 2] Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. Perused the chargesheet. 3] The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, the role attributed to the present is same and/or similar to that has been assigned to coaccused Amar M. Bhadrige who has been released on by by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thane by its Order dated 6th March 2017. The learned APP fairly conceded to the said fact. 1/2 4] Perusal of the chargesheet would indicate that, the present applicant has been assigned with same and/or similar role as that of the coaccused Amar M. Bhadrige who has been directed to be released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thane by its Order dated 6th March 2017 and therefore the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. Hence, the following Order: a] Applicant Chetan Bhanudas Randhire be released on his executing P.B. and S.B of Rs.40,000/ (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amiount. b] After his release from Jail, the applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on every first Monday of the month between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 hours till conclusion of trial. c] The applicant shall furnish his photograph, address proof and shall not involve in any such offence. 5] Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (A.S.GADKARI, J.)
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Chetan Bhanudas Randhire
Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandrabali Yadav .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … Mr. Vaibhav Ugle for the Applicant. Mr. Suraj S. Hulke, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 18TH DECEMBER, 2020. P.C:- Learned A.P.P. to place on record the postmortem report and supply a copy of the same to learned counsel for the Applicant. Re-notify for 13/01/2021. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 25th June, 2021 P.C. : . Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Stand over to 30/06/2021 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT None for Applicant Smt. A. A. Takalkar, AGP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 30th June, 2021 P.C. : None present for the applicant/respondent. Stand over to 26/07/2021 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … None for the Applicant. Mrs.A.A.Takalkar, APP for the State. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : JULY 26, 2021 P.C:- None for the applicant. Stand over to 9th August, 2021 [ SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J .]
Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Vaibhab Ugle with Vikas Samawanshi for the applicant. Mr.S.H. Yadav, APP for the State. … CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 5th AUGUST, 2021 P.C:- 1 To ensure compliance of the order dated 18th December 2020, list the application tomorrow i.e. 6th August 2021 for virtual hearing. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J
Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugale for the Applicant. Mr. S.H. Yadav, A.P.P. for the State. Mr. N.B. Chapale, PSI attached to MIDC Bhosari Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad is present in the court. … CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 06TH AUGUST, 2021. P.C:- Learned A.P.P. states that the final opinion as to the cause of death of the deceased is received on 24/07/2021 and the death is opined to have caused on account of 'head injury'. Learned A.P.P. states that after receipt of the said report, the prosecution is in the process of adding Section 302 to the charge-sheet and necessary steps in that regard has been taken. In such circumstances, the Application cannot be considered at this stage. In any case, since the steps are taken to add Section 302 of the IPC, the Applicant is bound to receive intimation of the same and with the change in the charge, he is at liberty to circulate the present Application. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]
Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT None for Applicant Ms. P. N. Dabholkar APP for the State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE J DATE : 30th September, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 15/11/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 19: 25-BA-1128-2020.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 ••• Mr. Ramesh C. Yadav ... Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents None for the Applicant. Smt. P.N.Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.DATE :15 th NOVEMBER, 2022. P.C. : None for the applicant. 2 Stand over to $19^{text{th}}$ December, 2022. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)
Order - Status 22: Shailaja IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 ….. ….. Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ] Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] Respondent None for the Applicant. Mr. A.A. Palkar, A.P.P, for Respondent – State. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. DATE : 5th JANUARY, 2024. P.C. None for the applicant. Looking to the orders passed by this Court from time to time, it appears that the applicant is not interested in prosecuting the application, hence, it stands rejected. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav
Order - Status 7: 503-ba-1383-18 Nalawade FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1383 OF 2018 Pradip A. Ramchandani vs. The State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memorandam of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. S.N. Naik i/by R.D.Suryawanshi for the applicant. Mrs. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the RespondentState. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 15th June, 2018 P.C. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, during the pendency of the present application the police have submitted charge sheet. In view of the change in circumstance, he seeks leave to withdraw the present application with liberty to file a fresh application for bail before the Trial Court. Leave and liberty granted. Disposed off as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. (A.S.GADKARI, J.) Page-1/1
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Pradeep Arjandas Ramchandani
Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1003 OF 2015 Harish Kondu Kokare ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.for the Applicant APP, for Respondent – State CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: JUNE 16, 2015 P.C.: The applicant/accused is facing charges u/s 307, 341,34...... in C.R. No.65 of 2015 registered at Lonavla police station (Rural). A complaint was given by one A.S. Ghole on 21.4.2015. The incident of assault has taken place on 21.4.2015 at around 8.15 pm, when the complainant and one Bhau Gaikwad, who was the Sarpanch of the Panchayat Samiti, were going in a car and at that time, the applicant/accused and the co-accused came in a Zen car and the car of the complainant was stopped. They attacked the Sarpanch Bhau Gaikwad and also the complainant Ananta Gule. Bhau Gaikwad was injured as he was stabbed 5 to 6 times on chest and throat by the assailants. He was sent to hospital and the applicant/accused was arrested and taken into custody on the same day i.e., 21.4.2015 and since then, he is in prison. Hence, this bail application. The learned Counsel for the applicant/accused relied on the contents in the FIR, wherein it is stated that the applicant/accused assaulted the complainant with fist blows and there is no act of assaulting Bhau Gaikwad is mentioned. He submitted that he was not holding any weapon. It is further submitted that the applicant/accused is one of the members of the Panchayat Samiti and he did not attend two meetings of the Panchayat Samiti. Now the third meeting is scheduled on 18th June, 2015 and, therefore, if he fails to attend the said meeting, as per law, he will be debarred and his appointment will be canceled. The learned Prosecutor has opposed the application. The Investigating Officer is not present. She relied on the description of the injuries on Bhau Gaikwad. Perused the FIR. The act attributed to the applicant/accused is of giving a fist blow to the complainant. No specific act is attributed to him of assaulting Bhau Gaikwad. In view of the submission that the applicant/accused will be out of Panchayat Samiti if he does not attend the third meeting, I am inclined to grant bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed on the following terms and conditions: i) The applicant/accused shall be released on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/-, with one or two sureties in the like amount; 2 / 3 ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence; iii) The applicant shall not indulge into any kind of offence including offence on human body and especially on the Panchayat Samiti members, while on bail; iv) The applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer and attend the concerned police station on every Friday, between 6pm to 7pm, for a period of one month. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Harish Kondu Kokare
Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 7th June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 04/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 4th July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 29/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 22nd August, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned.Stand over to 16/09/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 16th September, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 09/10/2019 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 9th October, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 15/11/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 15th November, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 06/12/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1482 OF 2019 Roshan Sunil Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent …... …... Mr.Silvin Y. Kale, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.A.A. Takalkar, APP APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : DECEMBER 20, 2019. P.C. : The applicants in both the applications were arrested in connection with C.R.No.I–291 of 2018, registered with Panvel City Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for the ofence punishable under Section 302j read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2 The case of the prosecution is that on 30th June, 2018, the victim/complainant was waiting at rickshaw stand. Accused Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde spoke to the victim and told him that he want to travel at Karanjade and the fare was fied at Rs.60/-. He boarded rickshaw. The victim dropped him at Karanjade. He paid Rs.50/- towards the fare although it was fied to be Rs.60/-. The victim demanded the balance amount. Accused Avi alias Ajinkya told him that he is associate of Rajesh Kaikadia and slapped him. The victim also slapped him. Thereafter, the victim went towards Panvel railway station and was waiting at rickshaw stand. At about 22:30 hrs., he went for smoking cigarette. Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde came and questioned him as to why he charges heavy fare and left the place. After some time, Ajinkya Shinde, Babu Kaikadia and two other persons approached the victim. Ajinkya Shinde assaulted him with iron rod in his head. As a result the victim fell down. Babu Kaikadia assaulted by knife and two other persons assaulted the victim by fst blows. Babu Kaikadia then assaulted him on head. The mother and wife of the victim reached the spot. Babu Kaikadia also assaulted his mother and all of them fled away from the place of incident. The victim was taken to the hospital. His statement was recorded, which was treated as First Information Report. Subsequently, victim succumbed to the injuries and charge under Section 302 of IPC was invoked. 3 Learned counsel for the applicant appearing for both the applicants submitted that there are major discrepancies in the evidence of witnesses. There are contradictions in the statements of eye witnesses. Applicants are falsely implicated,. There is no evidence against the applicant Roshan Pawar, the eye witnesses have given contradictory versions about the role played by him. Although, the applicant was identifed, subsequent to identifcation, diferent role is attributed to the said applicant. The version of both the eye witnesses were contradictory to each other. The applicants are in custody from the date of arrest and further detention is not necessary. Co-accused Iqbal Abdul Kadir Shaha has been granted bail by this Court. 4 Learned APP submitted that the role has been assigned to both the applicants. Applicant Avinash had picked up quarrel with the deceased. Thereafter, he came along with other accused and the victim was assaulted by weapons. The applicants are identifed by the eye witnesses. Thus, there is suficient evidence against the applicant and bail may not be granted. 5 Having heard both the sides. I have perused the charge–sheet. The frst informant is the victim of the crime. He has stated that accused Avi alias Ajinkya had quarreled with him. Subsequently, he came along with the other accused. In the frst information report, it is stated that Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde had assaulted the victim on his head by iron rod and Babu Kaikadia had assaulted by knife. Two unknown persons had allegedly caught hold of the victim. Thus, the role of assault is attributed to Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde and Babu Kaikadia. During the course of investigation, statement of Naziya and Sherbano were recorded. Naziya had stated in a statement under Section 164 that the victim was assaulted by Avi alias Ajinkya and others. Avi alias Ajinkya was holding iron rod and the other short person was holding knife. The victim was assaulted by iron rod on his head and the other person had assaulted by knife. Her statement was also recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., which is in consonance with her earlier statement. Thus, the said witness categorically stated that Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde had assaulted the victim by iron rod on his head and other persons assaulted by knife. Statement of Sherbano was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She has stated that accused Avi alias Ajinkya and others had assaulted the victim. The identifcation parade was conducted. In the parade Naziya has identifed accused Roshan Pawar and stated that Roshan Pawar had assaulted victim by knife. The other witness Ayesha has also identifed Roshan Pawar and during the identifcation stated that he had assaulted the victim by fst blows. Thus, apparently, there are discrepancies in the evidence with regards to the role played by Roshan Pawar in the FIR, statement of eye witnesses and the identifcation parade. However, as far as Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde, is concerned, specifc overtact has been attributed to him. There is consistency in the evidence of witnesses. He was the cause of quarrel and incident of murder. The victim as well as other witnesses have attributed him role of assault. In this circumstances, applicant Roshan Pawar can be granted bail, however, applicant Ajinkya @ Avinash Shinde is not entitled for bail. 7 Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: (i) Bail Application No.1482 of 2019, is allowed and disposed of; (ii) Applicant Roshan Sunil Pawar, is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.I– 291 of 2018, registered with Panvel City Police Station, Navi Mumbai, on his eiecuting P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant Roshan Sunil Pawar, shall attend the concerned police station once in a month on frst Saturday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, till the conclusion of the trial; (iv) Bail Application No.1483 of 2019, is rejected. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde
Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2386 OF 2021 Vishal Mangesh Yadav .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … Mr. N.M. Nadar h/f. Mr. S.V. Marwadi for the Applicant. Ms. A.A. Takalkar, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 13TH SEPTEMBER, 2021. P.C:- At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant, list the matter on 06/10/2021. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]
Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2386 OF 2021 Vishal Mangesh Yadav APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 23rd November, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 13/12/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2386 OF 2021 Vishal Mangesh Yadav APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 13th December, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 05/01/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )
Order - Status 10: PMB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2386 OF 2021 PRADNYA MAKARAND BHOGALE signed by PRADNYA MAKARAND BHOGALE Date: 2023.01.05 17:10:30 +0530 Digitally VISHAL MANGESH YADAV ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT ------------ None for the applicant. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State. Mr. Vaibhav Pawar, PSI, Nalasopara Police Station is present. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : JANUARY 5, 2023. P.C. : 1. None appears for the applicant. 2. Only by way of an indulgence, list the matter on 06/01/2023. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)
Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2386 OF 2021 VISHAL MANGESH YADAV ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT ------------ Adv. Veerdhaval Kakade i/b Adv. Mrunal Jadhav for the applicant. Ms. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State. ------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : JANUARY 6, 2023. P.C. : 1. Considering the applicant is in custody for more than 4 years and 6 months, the Trial Court is requested to expedite the trial. I am informed that the charge has now been framed. 2. In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave to withdraw the application. The application is allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of accordingly. 3. In case the trial does not substantially proceed, liberty to file a fresh application after 6 months. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)
1) Document Filed: Vakalatnama
Filed By : Vishal Mangesh Yadav
Advocate: Mrunal Laxmanroa Jadhav
Filed Document - Date of Receiving - 1: 28/07/2022
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Vishal Mangesh Yadav