In a bail application where the applicant remained absent on multiple listing occasions, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissed the application for want of prosecution after noting the inability to carry it forward.
Application dismissed for want of prosecution.
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.
916-APPA.1404.2016.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1404 OF 2016 IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 462 OF 2016
Chetan Suresh Awale } Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra } Respondent
Ms. Nagina Tandan for the applicantabsent.
Ms. S. V. Sonawane-APP for State.
CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & PRAKASH. D. NAIK, JJ.
DATED :- APRIL 4, 2018
P.C. :-
occasions. On most of them, either the applicant's advocate has sought time or has remained absent. We cannot carry the application seeking bail filed on 19th November, 2016 to April, 2018 and onwards. Today also, when it is called out, the applicant's advocate is absent.
2. The application is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(PRAKASH.D.NAIK, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Page 1 of 1
J.V.Salunke,PA
Chetan Suresh Awale
The State of Maharashtra
S. C. DHARMADHIKARI
PRAKASH. D. NAIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
