The court dismissed a second bail application by the applicant. Noting that the trial had commenced and five prosecution witnesses were examined, the judge ruled that releasing the applicant on bail was not inclined at this stage.
Application rejected; applicant not released.
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.
50.BA.599.18.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.599 OF 2018
Mrs. Usha Sopan Thupe
… Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra (Through Mira Road Police Station, District Thane) … Respondent
Mr. Santosh Bhamre for the Applicant. Mr. S.S. Hulke, APP for the Respondent State.
CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J.
DATE : 22nd JUNE 2018
P.C.:
dated 07.10.2016. The record indicates that the trial of the present
crime has been already commenced and the prosecution has examined about five witnesses till date.
that, in the evidence of various witnesses recorded till date, no role of
the applicant is disclosed by any of the witnesses and therefore, she
1/2
Aarti Palkar
50.BA.599.18.doc
may be released on bail.
(A.S.GADKARI, J.)
2/2
Aarti Palkar
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant, whose prior bail application was rejected and whose trial is progressing, can be released on bail when no incriminating evidence has been led against her.
Whether bail should be granted at this stage given that five prosecution witnesses have already been examined.
Whether the absence of disclosed role of the applicant in witness evidence warrants release on bail.
Mrs. Usha Sopan Thupe
The State of Maharashtra
A.S. Gadkari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
