Surendra B. Pathare v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court rejected the anticipatory bail application of an applicant accused of rape and kidnapping, finding allegations serious and custodial interrogation necessary despite prosecutrix's delay.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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 / 19 912-ABA-1127-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1127 OF 2019
Surendra Pathare .... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents
- Mr.G.S. Godbole i/b. Mandar M. Goswami, Advocate for Applicant.
- Mr.Abhishek R. Avachat, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
- Mr.J.P. Yagnik, APP for the State/Respondent.
- PI Krushna Indalkar, Chandan Nagar Police Station, Pune City, present.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 20th JUNE, 2019
P.C. :
- The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No.145/19 registered with Chandan Nagar Police Station, Pune City, under sections 376, 377, 498-A, 406, 504, 323, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail ought to be granted to the applicant in the given circumstances.
Whether the delay in filing the FIR is fatal to the prosecutrix's case.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Surendra Pathare
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra
Coram
SARANG V. KOTWAL
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court