Single judge rejected an application for bail, holding that no fresh circumstances existed as a period of liberty granted previously remained unconsummated due to non-framing of charges within the stipulated timeframe.
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.
Digitally signed by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SATISH SANGAR RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2024.02.23 16:07:20 +0530
29-BA-1781-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1781 OF 2023
Vikas Mohan Thakur ...Applicant
vs.
State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents
Mr.Omkar Sambherao a/w Mr.Manoj Bachate and Ms.Varsha Shetty – Advocate for Applicant. Mr.Vishwajeet N. Sagare – APP for Respondent No.1 – State.
CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J.
DATE : 21st FEBRUARY 2024
copy is on Page No.268.
for bail if the charge is not framed within a period of two years. The
period of two years is yet not over. As such, there is no change in
circumstance.
1/2
Satish Sangar
29-BA-1781-2023.doc
2/2
Satish Sangar
1 issue framed by the court
Whether fresh circumstances exist to grant bail in a bail application rejected in earlier proceedings without framing of charges.
Vikas Mohan Thakur
State of Maharashtra
S. M. Modak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
