Allowed

The State of Maharashtra v. Ganesh Narayan Shinde and Anr.

Bombay HC26 Apr 2005APPLN/2352/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay granted the State of Maharashtra's criminal application to cancel anticipatory bail granted to the respondents. The Court found substance in the State's contention that the order could not withstand judicial scrutiny due to evidence linking the respondents to a suicide case, involving names mentioned in the suicide note.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside; Ante-mortem order quashed; Respondents directed to surrender and apply for regular bail.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Ganesh Narayan Shinde and Anr. — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶2

 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2352 OF 2005

¶4

IN

¶5

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2182 OF 2005

¶6

 The State of Maharashtra ...Applicant

¶7

 Versus

¶8

 Ganesh Narayan Shinde & Anr. ...Respondents

¶9

 Mr.A.S.Gadkari, A.P.P. for Applicant.

¶10

 Mr.V.V.Purwant for Respondents.

¶11

CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.

¶12

 APRIL 26, 2005.

¶13

P.C.

¶14

 1. Heard Counsel for the parties.

¶15

 2. This Application is filed by the State for
 cancellation of anticipatory bail granted in favour
 of the Respondents by the III Additional Sessions

¶16

 Judge, Solapur.

¶17

 : 2 :

¶18

 3. I find substance in the contentions raised
 on behalf of the State that the order in question
 cannot stand the test of judicial scrutiny. I am
 not elaborating the reasons that has weighed with
 me for making this observation, as the Counsel for
 the Respondents submits that the same will affect
 the merits of the application for regular bail, to
 be preferred by the Respondents before the
 appropriate Court.

¶19

 4. Suffice it to observe that as the names of
 Respondents are mentioned in the suicide note left
 behind by the deceased and supporting evidence of
 the other witnesses, it was not a case for grant of
 anticipatory bail, having regard to the seriousness
 of the offence. Hence, this Application succeeds.
 The impugned order is set-aside.

¶20

 5. The Respondents undertake to surrender
 before the appropriate Court on or before 3rd May
 2005 and apply for regular bail, if so advised,
 which application may be considered on its own
 merits in accordance with law.

¶21

 : 3 :

¶22

 6. In the meantime, Respondents shall report
 to the Investigating Officer daily from tomorrow
 between 3.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. or such other time
 or place, as may be required by the Investigating
 Officer and co-operate with the investigation of
 the case.

¶23

 7. Failing to comply with the above
 condition, it will be open to the Investigating
 Officer to proceed against the Respondents in
 accordance with law.

¶24

 8. Application disposed of on the above

¶25

 terms.

¶26

 A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.

The State of Maharashtra v. Ganesh Narayan Shinde and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra v. Ganesh Narayan Shinde and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunita Pavankumar Morarka Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Jayesh Mahendra Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra

Fazila W/O.Abdul Gaffar Mahimi and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sumanagala Ramesh Satte and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yaseer Mohammed Ayyub Bagwan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Bajrang Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra