The applicant's bail application was disposed of without issuing notice or hearing, as the advocate was absent and the trial had commenced with witness examination underway.
Bail application disposed of without consideration due to absence of advocate and ongoing trial.
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.
9.ba2151.17
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2151 OF 2017
Rajendra Kisan Gunjal. ... Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent. ---
None for Applicant.
Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP for State.
CORAM : SMT.SADHANA S. JADHAV,J DATE : DECEMBER 20, 2017
P.C.:
1 The advocate appointed for the applicant is not present. The learned APP submits that the application of the co-accused bearing No. 2058 of 2017 (Rahim Munnawar Pathan v/s. State of Maharashtra) was disposed of by the coordinate bench(Coram : Mrs. Mridula Bhatkar, J) vide order dated 3/10/2017. It is observed that the trial has commenced and 10 to 14 witnesses are examined. Time for conclusion of trial has been extended by this Court. In view of this, it would not be appropriate to consider the application under
Talwalkar
1/2
2 9.ba2151.17
section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Hence, the application stands disposed of accordingly.
Office to communicate this order to the applicant who is lodged in Nashik Central Prison.
( SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV , J)
Talwalkar
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail application should be considered despite absence of counsel given trial has commenced and time extended.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajendra Kisan Gunjal
The State of Maharashtra
Sadhana S. Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
