The High Court admitted a criminal appeal challenging an acquittal. Pending Supreme Court leave, the impugned order was quashed and bail was granted to the respondent.
Impugned order recalled; action under Section 390 CrPC; bail enlarged.
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.
22-ALS-65-2018.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.65 OF 2018
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2018
The State of Maharashtra … Applicant Vs Rakesh Mukesh Pednekar ... Respondent …
Ms. P.P.Shinde, APP for the Applicant-State.
CORAM : A.S.OKA & SANDEEP K. SHINDE J J. DATE : 8 JANUARY, 2019
P.C. :
Heard the learned APP for the State. Leave is granted. Appeal is admitted. There shall be action under Section 390 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. However, the concerned Court
shall immediately enlarge the Respondent on appropriate bail.
(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.) (A.S.OKA, J.)
Shivgan 1/1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to recall/review the acquittal of the respondent.
Whether to grant bail to the respondent pending impugned order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Maharashtra
Rakesh Mukesh Pednekar
A.S.Oka
Sandeep K. Shinde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
