Kamal Umar Dhanse v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
In this bail application, the High Court of Bombay rejected the plea for further bail. The Court held that since the accused was delaying the trial by taking adjournments, the application was rejected in his own interest, with the trial expedited.
What did the court decide?
Bail application rejected; trial expedited.
What the court decided
ISM
1 6.1424.19 ba.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1424 OF 2019
Kamal Umar Dhanse
.....Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
.....Respondent
Mr. Rajendra Sorankar i/b Ketan Dabke for the applicant Mr. R. M. Pethe APP for the State
Mr. Amin Solkar i/b Misbaah Solkar for complainant
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 13, 2019.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted given the delay in trial allegedly caused by the accused taking adjournments.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Kamal Umar Dhanse
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra
Coram
Nitin W. Sambre
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Dr. Ramesh D. Nikam Vs Dr. Sujeet Dange and Anr.
Securities and Exchange Board of India through Its Authorized Officer Avinash Dhumal Vs Bpl Limited and Ors.
Securities and Exchange Board of India through Its Authorized Officer Avinash Dhumal Vs Bpl Limited and Ors.
Ravindra Laxman Davande Vs Prathamesh Vijay Masurkar and Anr.