Dismissed

Shankar Hanumant Nagam v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Oct 2017APPA/1058/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant under imprisonment for an offence under Section 307 IPC filed a fresh bail application alleging his wife's brain tumor requires his presence. The Court dismissed the application, holding the medical certificate relied upon was unverified and the applicant had no independent ground for bail after a previous dismissal on merits.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shankar Hanumant Nagam Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2017)

9 APPA 1058.17.doc

Phjayani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1058 OF 2017 IN

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 83 OF 2017

¶7

Shankar Hanumant Nagam ….Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ….Respondent

¶8

Mr. Hrishikesh Chavan for the applicant. Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for Respondent/State.

¶9

CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.

¶10

DATE : 09th OCTOBER, 2017

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

By this application, the applicant who is undergoing sentence of imprisonment for five years for offence under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, has sought suspension of execution of sentence and bail, which was dismissed on merits by order dated 21^st March, 2017.

¶13

Subsequent to the dismissal of the said application, the applicant has now filed fresh application for bail on the ground of sickness of his wife. The medical reports which are placed on record from page 35 to 46 indicate that the wife of the applicant had undergone brain surgery in the year 2012. Based on the said medical reports of the year 2012, the applicant has now relied upon the certificate dated 20^th May, 2017 issued by the Neurosurgeon from Nishkal Neuro Hospital, Nizamabad to contend that his wife is suffering from brain tumor and that his

¶14

2 9 APPA 1058.17.doc

¶15

Phjayani

¶16

presence is required to attend to his wife. A perusal of the said medical certificate dated 20^th May, 2017 reads thus :-

¶17

“ This is pt. Pooja w/o. Shankar Nagam. She has taken treatment in Nishkal Neuro Hospital for brain tumor and brain surgery has done and she mentally distoped by her husband and she need her husband help in this time otherwise she will be in danger stage. ”

¶18

It is evident that the said medical certificate is based on the previous report of the year 2012/2013. A doctor has not verified whether the wife of the applicant is suffering from any sickness. He claims that the presence of the husband is required by her side.

¶19

In my considered view, the applicant cannot be released on bail on said ground, particularly, when the bail application has already been dismissed on merits.

¶20

Hence, the Criminal Application No. 1058 of 2017 is dismissed.

¶21

(SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Shankar Hanumant Nagam v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shankar Hanumant Nagam v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Ravindra Annarao Konapure

Mukesh Murli Gupta Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suresh Angloswami Naidu Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sanjid a. Gafar Saheblal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dastagir Abdul Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shreenath Chintamani Bhandari and Ors. Vs Tarabai Jagannath Verma and Anr.