Aniket Viju Kuchekar v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court disposed of three bail applications filed under Section 439 CrPC. The court held that since the prosecution filed an application for extending the 90-day investigation period under the MCOC Act before the expiry of the statutory period, the accused lost their indefeasible right to statutory bail. The High Court affirmed the Trial Court's order rejecting the default bail applications
What did the court decide?
Bail Applications Nos. 1182/2021 and 1187/2021 were rejected; Bail Application No. 664/2021 was dismissed.
What the court decided
ba1187.21.odt
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1182 OF 2021
Aniket Viju Kuchekar
Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Respondent
Mr. S.S. Jadhav, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.M.Kagne, APP for respondent/State.
WITH
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1187 OF 2021
- Bandu @ Suraj Sahebrao Sathe 2. Akshay Govind Shirsath Applicants
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an accused is entitled to statutory bail when the Investigating Officer files an application for extension of the 90-day charge-sheet period before the statutory period expires.
Whether a High Court can consider an application for statutory bail while a prayer for extension of the investigation period by the Public Prosecutor is pending before it.
Whether the rejection of default bail was justified when the application for extension of time was filed before expiry of the 90-day period and subsequently granted.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Aniket Viju Kuchekar
- applicant
Bandu @ Suraj Sahebrao Sathe
- applicant
Akshay Govind Shirsath
- respondent
State of Maharashtra
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court