In an anticipatory bail application, the court refused pre-arrest bail but directed the Investigating Officer to serve the applicant with 72 hours notice before arrest concerning a crime where section 304 IPC was added.
Pre-arrest bail denied; direction to IO to serve 72 hours notice before arrest.
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.
S
aba1201.13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1201 OF 2013
Mahadev Bapurao Dhygude .. Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent.
Mr. Dipak Shivaji Shinde for the applicant. Ms. A. A. Mane APP for the State.
CORAM : A. H. JOSHI, J.
DATED : 23RD OCTOBER, 2013.
(A. H. JOSHI, J.)
1/1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to pre-arrest bail given the addition of section 304 IPC to the registered crime.
Whether the procedure of serving 72 hours notice before arrest is appropriate in this case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mahadev Bapurao Dhygude
The State of Maharashtra
A. H. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
