The Court rejected a writ petition challenging a Vacation Court order dismissing an anticipatory bail application. The judgment held that the lower court's direction to approach the lowest forum first was sound and legal, requiring no interference.
The petition was 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 74 OF 2008
Shri Shayamjit Mataprasad Yadav & ors. ] .. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ] .. Respondent
Mr. R.V. Bhasin i/b M/s. Jalan Legal Associates for
the petitioners.
Mr. A.R. Patil, APP, for the respondent.
CORAM: S.B. MHASE &
SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ.
DATED: 28TH JANUARY, 2008
P.C. :
1. Heard.
2. This is a Petition challenging the order
passed by this court on 28th December, 2007, as a
Vacation Court. We have perused the order. The court
has expressed that though there is no bar in approaching
this court, yet it is a sound practice that the
applicant should have approached the lowest forum to
press for anticipatory bail application. This order is
perfectly sound and legal and requires no interference
: 2 :
by this court. No further clarification is required.
3. We refuse to entertain the Petition and the
Petition is, hereby, rejected.
Sd/- Sd/-
[SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] [S.B. MHASE, J.]
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to entertain a writ petition challenging a previous order on anticipatory bail procedure.
Shri Shayamjit Mataprasad Yadav & ors.
The State of Maharashtra
S.B. MHASE
V.K. TAHILRAMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court