A two-judge bench dismissed a bail application seeking suspension of sentence. The court held that the findings of fact were sufficient and the application did not merit consideration.
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.
1/2 (21)APPA-219-13
Tilak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.219 of 2013 IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.919 of 2007
Anil Daya Bhai Parmar ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Ms.Anamika Malhotra, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr.F.R.Shaikh, APP for the State.
CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND
ABHAY M. THIPSAY, JJ.
DATED : FEBRUARY 25, 2013
P.C.
1 By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of the sentence and enlargement of the applicant on bail, pending the decision of the appeal. Similar request made by the applicant was rejected by this Court by its order dated 28 September 2010. After considering the matter on merits, the Division Bench had found that no case for suspension of the sentence and enlargement of the accused on bail, was made out.
2/2 (21)APPA-219-13
2 We have perused the findings against the applicant, and according to us, this second Bail Application also does not merit any consideration.
3 Accordingly, Criminal Application No.219 of 2013 is dismissed.
( ABHAY M.THIPSAY,J ) (P.V.HARDAS,J)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the bail application seeks suspension of sentence and enlargement on bail merits consideration.
Anil Daya Bhai Parmar
The State of Maharashtra
P.V.Hardas
Abhay M. Thipsay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
