High Court dismissed bail application in a murder trial where the applicant was specifically named as an assailant by the eye-witness of the cold-blooded killing. Bench upheld previous rejection.
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
abs
FARAD CONTINUATION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 297 OF 2010
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders
Court's or Judge's Orders
Mr. S.D. Rupwate for the applicant.
Mr. Y.S. Shinde, A.P.P. for the State.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J.
DATE : 25TH JANUARY 2010
P.C. :
bail in connection with C.R. No.107 of 2009 registered at R.C.F. Police Station, Mumbai for an offence punishable under section 302 of the
I.P.C.
death or imprisonment for life. Nephew of the
2
victim is an eye witness. He has filed the F.I.R. in which he has specifically named the applicant as an assailant. Murder appears to have been committed in a cold blooded manner on account of previous quarrel. In the circumstances, in my view, the applicant is not entitled to bail.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail is maintainable for an applicant charged with murder as an assailant named as such by the eyes-witness.
Whether the grave nature of the offence punishable with death or life imprisonment bars grant of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Applicant
State
D.G. Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
