the court held that anticipatory bail applications filed after the arrest of the accused are infructuous and disposed of them accordingly, noting that legal remedies remain available.
both anticipatory bail applications were disposed of as infructuous.
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.
686.19abappln etc
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.686 OF 2019
Sachin s/o Nagraj Mhaske ..APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.687 OF 2019
Karim s/o Sahebkha Pathan ..APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT
Mr S. G. Sangle, A.P.P. for respondent
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J
DATE : 14th December, 2020
PER COURT:
686.19abappln etc (2)
01/07/2019. The said copy is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. The learned Prosecutor points out from the last paragraph that the accused Sachin was arrested on 15-06-2019 and the accused Karim was arrested on 14-06-2019. He, therefore, submits that these two applications seeking anticipatory bail are rendered infructuous.
(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
sjk
3 issues framed by the court
whether anticipatory bail applications are infructuous after the arrest of the applicants.
what relief is appropriate when anticipatory bail is sought after arrest.
what legal remedies remain available to applicants after bail is held infructuous.
sachin s/o nagraj mhaske
karim s/o sahebkha pathan
the state of maharashtra
ravindra v. ghuge
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
