Applicants sought withdrawal of their anticipatory bail application to reapply before the sessions court, citing a co-accused's grant of anticipatory bail as changed circumstances. The court dismissed the application as withdrawn with liberty to apply afresh.
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.
2024:BHC-AUG:26814
1 915
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
915 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1612 OF 2024
RAMNATH TUKARAM KALE AND ANOTHER VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
Advocate for Applicants :
Mr. V. D. Hon, Senior Advocate i/b. Mr. Hon Ashwin Vinayak APP for Respondent/State: Mr. B. A. Shinde
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 13th NOVEMBER, 2024
PER COURT:
Ashwin Vinayak, learned counsel for the applicants seeks leave to withdraw the present application and apply before the concerned sessions court. The learned Senior Advocate submits that after dismissal of the anticipatory bail application of the applicants the sessions court has granted anticipatory bail to one of the co-accused. In view of the changed circumstances, he seeks leave to withdraw the present application and approach the concerned sessions court for fresh consideration of the anticipatory bail application.
2 915
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.]
marathe
Ramnath Tukaram Kale
The State of Maharashtra
Arun R. Pedneker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
