In an anticipatory bail application, the High Court found sufficient material to prima facie infer the applicant's involvement in the crime warranting custodial interrogation, and consequently rejected the plea.
The anticipatory bail application was rejected.
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.
1/2 Yadav 27.aba.239.19
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 239 OF 2019
Mangesh vithal Bhorekar … Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent
Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil for Applicant. Ms. S. S. Kaushik, APP for Respondent – State.
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. DATE : JANUARY 28, 2019.
P.C. :
. In Crime No. 96 of 2018 for an offence punishable under Sections 307, 384, 143, 147, 148, 149, 506 & 427 of the Indian Penal Code, the Applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail.
2/2 Yadav 27.aba.239.19
Hence rejected.
(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Applicant is entitled to pre-arrest bail given prima facie evidence of involvement and victim injury.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Mangesh Vithal Bhorekar
State of Maharashtra
Nitin W. Sambre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
