The court rejected an application for temporary bail. It noted the applicant was already released on furlough leave and found no justification for granting temporary bail.
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
pdp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 795 OF 2009
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 442 OF 2006
Rangalal Gangadhar Gupta
.. Applicant
(Org. Accd. No.2)
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
.. Respondent
Ms. Ameeta Kuttikrishnan i/by Ms. S.D. Khot for applicant. Smt. V.R. Bhosale, APP for State. Mr. S.P. Kadam for the original complainant.
CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & R.Y. GANOO, JJ.
P.C.
We have heard Ms. Ameeta Kuttikrishnan, the learned counsel for the applicant-accused no.2. By this application he prays for being released on temporary bail.
It is not disputed that the applicant was released on furlough leave in April, 2009 and we do not find any justification to entertain this application at this point of time so as to release him on temporary bail.
The application is rejected.
(R.Y. GANOO,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for temporary bail should be allowed given the applicant was released on furlough leave.
Rangalal Gangadhar Gupta
The State of Maharashtra
B.H. Marlapalle
R.Y. Ganoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
