The High Court of Bombay rejected a bail application in a criminal case. The Court held that the circumstantial evidence and the likelihood of a trial within a short span rendered the application unworthy, denying the relief sought.
The bail application for the second occasion was rejected.
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.
1/2 2 BA 332-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.332 OF 2024
Chetan Shahaji Jadhav .. Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
Ms. Sana Raees Khan a/w Mr. Aditya Parmar for the applicant. Ms. Mahalaxmi Ganpathy, APP for the State.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 27th MARCH, 2024
P.C:-
1 On 3/08/2021, considering the role attributed to the applicant based on the recording in the CCTV footage when accused nos.1 and 2 are seen in the company of the deceased, the evidence in form of last seen was taken into account, when I refused the relief in his favour.
It was categorically recorded that the evidence in the charge-sheet is in form of circumstantial evidence and the two incriminating circumstances against the applicant, he being spotted in the CCTV footage in company of accused no.1 and 2 in the Alto Car, which carried the deceased towards Pune and the second is the discovery of the chappal of the deceased at the instance, the applicant was sufficient enough to point out his indiction in the crime. Being aggrieved by the said order, Special Leave Petition was preferred, and on 30/05/2023 it was
Ashish
2/2 2 BA 332-2024.doc
dismissed.
2 Though the learned counsel for the applicant Ms. Sana Khan would press into service the ground for long incarceration, according to me considering the role attributed to him and the material available against him in the charge-sheet, is not by itself sufficient to secure his release on bail, when it is informed that the charge is framed and the trial is likely to commence within a short span of time. For the reasons recorded, the application filed on the second occasion do not deserve to be entertained and hence it is rejected.
( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
Ashish
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail considering the circumstantial evidence and the likely commencement of trial.
Chetan Shahaji Jadhav
State of Maharashtra
Bharati Dangre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
