Applicant sought bail pending criminal appeal despite lengthy custody. Court found no merit, rejected application due to lack of changed circumstances, but expedited the appeal hearing.
Application rejected; hearing in Criminal Appeal No.107 of 2006 expedited.
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
srk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Appellate Side Criminal Application No.536 of 2009 In Criminal Appeal No.107 of 2006
Mehtab Alam Lalai Choudhari Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra Respondent
Mr.Deepak Khushwa with Mr.R.G.Gadgil and Mr.V.V.Ingawale for applicant.
Smt.V.R.Bhosale, APP for State.
CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & SMT.ROSHAN S. DALVI,JJ.
July 28, 2009.
P.C.
2
that after the first application for bail was rejected, there is no change in circumstances and, therefore, this application must be rejected.
(SMT.ROSHAN S. DALVI,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail pending criminal appeal given his long period in custody without any change in circumstances.
Mehtab Alam Lalai Choudhari
The State of Maharashtra
B.H. Marlapalle
Roshan S. Dalvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
