Sanjay Bajirao Jagtap v. Ravikiran v Ingavale and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court rejected two criminal applications seeking cancellation of bail. The court held that minor procedural deviations like meeting family before leaving jurisdiction did not violate bail conditions, and election activities permitted by the court were not lapses. Regarding trial attendance, the court found that scheduled adjournment requests were rejected and the trial would proceed in hi
What did the court decide?
The applications for cancellation of bail filed by the State and the first informant were rejected.
What the court decided
BAG-20.11
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE - CRIMINAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.20 OF 2011
The State of Maharashtra.... Applicant
Vs.
Ravikiran V. Ingavale.... Respondent
Ms G.P. Mulekar, APP, for the Applicant.
S/Shri S.R. Borulkar with Manoj Patil
for the Respondent.
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2 OF 2011 IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1909 OF 2009
Sanjay Bajirao Jagtap.... Applicant
Vs.
Ravikiran V. Ingavale
& Anr..... Respondents
Shri Prashant Naik for the Applicant.
S/Shri S.R. Borulkar with Manoj Patil
for Respondent No.1.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the alleged minor delay in moving out of jurisdiction and the election-related entry into Kolhapur warrant cancellation of bail.
Whether the failure of the respondent to attend trial court and file adjournment applications amounts to grounds for cancelling bail.
Whether the applications for cancellation of bail should be allowed or rejected on the facts presented.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
The State of Maharashtra
- respondent
Ravikiran V. Ingavale
- applicant
Sanjay Bajirao Jagtap
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court