In this bail application, the applicant sought release on bail arguing that no chances existed of the appeal being heard in the near future. The court held that such delay could not be a ground for bail consideration at that stage and rejected the application.
Bail application rejected.
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-)
MGN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.118 OF 2008
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.576 OF 2005
Abhijit Bhargav Kolwankar.........Applicant
Vs.
State of Maharashtra.....Respondent
None for the Applicant
Mr. P.S. Hingorani, APP for the State.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&
SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ.
DATED: 10th April,2008
P.C.:
. When the matter is called out none present
for the applicant. The previous bail application
bearing No.4405 of 2005 was rejected on 29th
November, 2005. In the present application the only
ground made is that there are no chances of the
Appeal being heard in the near future. That can be
no ground for consideration of bail at this stage.
Hence application for bail is rejected.
(SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in hearing of the appeal is a valid ground to grant bail.
Whether the bail application should succeed after the previous application was rejected.
Abhijit Bhargav Kolwankar
State of Maharashtra
F.I. Rebello
V.K. Tahilramani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court