In Criminal Application No. 1470 of 2006, the Bombay High Court disposed of the applicant's bail application without deciding on merits, directing him to file a fresh bail application before the trial court to allow the latter to consider the merits.
The application was disposed of with liberty to apply afresh before the trial court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLAGTE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1470 OF 2006.
Ravikant Harischandra Shinde .. Applicant
V/s
The State of Maharashtra. .. Respondent.
Mr. Subhash Jha i/b Ghanshyam Upadhyay for the applicant
Mr. R.Y. Mirza, A.P.P. for the State.
CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE : 21ST AUGUST, 2006.
P.C.
. Mr. Jha has submitted that the approach of the
learned trial Judge in rejecting the application for
bail is wholly erroneous and unsustainable. The
application for bail has been rejected on 23rd March,
2006. Prior there to, number of prosecution witnesses
have been examined during the course of trial. The
learned Judge has observed fairly that some of them have
not supported the case of the prosecution. In such
circumstances, and, when the other accused have been
enlarged on bail by this Court, the application of the
present applicant could not have been rejected.
2. I have perused the application and annexures
thereto with the assistance of Mr. Jha for the applicant
and Mr. Mirza for the respondent.
[2]
3. The order passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, on 23rd March, 2006 refers to the aspect
of some of the witnesses not supporting the prosecution.
In my view, after this order the proceedings have
progressed further. There is time limit set for
conclusion of the trial. In such circumstances,
appropriate course would be to direct the trial Court
that, in the event the applicant presents an application
for bail afresh the same shall be considered on merits
and in accordance with law without being influenced by
any observations made in the order dated 23 March, 2006
and the disposal of the present application by this
Court.
4. This application is disposed of only to enable
the applicant to file a fresh bail application, as in my
view the best person to appreciate the materials
available on record would be the trial Judge before whom
the trial is presently going on. Any expression by this
Court would prejudice both sides either way. In such
circumstances, with liberty to apply for bail afresh
before the trial Court, the present application is
disposed of.
[3]
( S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should decide the merits of the bail application or dispose of it to allow the High Court to be heard by the trial judge.
Ravikant Harischandra Shinde
The State of Maharashtra
S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court