Dismissed

Aashish @ Gorya Chaandrakant Gurav v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC13 Mar 2023BA/3376/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the appellant's second bail application, distinguishing a bail order granted to a co-accused. However, directing the Sessions Court to frame charges within three months and conclude the trial within one year due to long incarceration.

What did the court decide?

Sessions Court directed to frame charges within three months and conclude trial within one year due to long incarceration.

Aashish @ Gorya Chaandrakant Gurav Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1/2 14 BA-3376-22.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

BAIL APPLICATION NO.3376 OF 2022

¶4

Aashish @ Gorya Chaandrakant .. Appellant Gurav

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra

¶7

.. Respondent

¶8

Mr.Vinod Kashid for the Applicant. Ms.A.A.Takalkar, A.P.P. for the State.

¶9

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 13^th MARCH, 2023

¶10

P.C:-

¶11

On 06/10/2022, I had rejected the bail application of the applicant, considering the material collected by the prosecution against him. A reasoned order makes reference to various statements from which the role of the applicant has clearly surfaced on record.

¶12

By the second bail application, the learned counsel Mr.Kashid wants me to look into the merits of the matter once again, by submitting that some material has not been looked into.

¶13

I am afraid, whether the learned counsel wants to review the order passed by me, rejecting the bail application.

¶14

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶15

2/2 14 BA-3376-22.odt

¶16

Mr.Kashid would rely upon the order dated 28/02/2023 passed by this Court (Coram : M.S.Karnik, J.) in the case of coaccused Rohit Dinesh Salekar (Bail Application No.1295 of 2022). Perusal of the said order would reveal that the only ground on which the co-accused was released on bail is, his long incarceration for more than fve and half years and the trial will take it’s own time. Apart from this, there was no overt act attributed to the said co-accused.

¶17

The case of the applicant is clearly distinguishable and, since, I have already rejected the bail application on merits, I do not think that there is any change in circumstance to recall the said order and once again re-consider the request of the applicant for release on bail.

¶18

Hence, the application is dismissed.

¶19

However, the long incarceration of the applicant, prompts me to direct the Sessions Court, Thane to frame the charge within a period of three months from today and make every endeavour to expeditiously conclude the trial, preferably within a period of one year, after framing of charge.

¶20

( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶21

M.M.Salgaonkar

Aashish @ Gorya Chaandrakant Gurav v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aashish @ Gorya Chaandrakant Gurav v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Rajaram Kadam Vs State of Maharashtra

Dhananjay Vilas Powar and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Vikram Chandrakant Pasalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mukundan Raman Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Nitin Arjun Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Krishnat Shankar Kadav Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.