The High Court rejected the anticipatory bail application of the applicant, holding that sufficient material against him existed to prevent grant of protection.
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.
4-ABA-1516-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1516 OF 2021
Aashish @ Bablu Anil Kadam .... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent
Mr.Dhananjay D. Rananaware, for the applicant. Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP for the State/Respondent.
CORAM:SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 2nd JULY, 2021
P.C. :
counsel for the applicant and Mr. S.H. Yadav, learned APP for the State.
y.s.patil
1 of 4
4-ABA-1516-2021.odt
y.s.patil
2 of 4
4-ABA-1516-2021.odt
(i) C.L.W. 2 cm in length coupled with
approximated margin. It is described as simple injury.
(ii) C.L.W. 1 Cm in length coupled with
y.s.patil
4-ABA-1516-2021.odt
approximated margin. It is also described as simple injury.
(iii) However, the third injury Is linear fracture
of nasal bone on both sides. Cause of injury is mentioned by sword and it is described as a grievous injury.
The application is rejected.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
y.s.patil
4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant was entitled to grant of anticipatory bail in the instant proceedings?
Aashish @ Bablu Anil Kadam
State of Maharashtra
SARANG V. KOTWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
