Sachin Chandrakant Dangat v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.100 OF 2015 Sachin Chandrakant Dangat ...

Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra ...

Respondent .....

Mr.Sanjiv A. Sawant with Mr.Sachin Kadam, Advocate for the Applicant.

Mr.Deepak Thakre, APP for the Respondent/State. ....

CORAM :

ABHAY M. THIPSAY J.

DATED :

29TH JANUARY, 2015 P.C.

1.

Heard Mr.Sawant, the learned counsel for the applicant. Heard Mr.Thakre, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

2.

Pursuant to the order passed on 19 th January, 2015, report has been received from the trial Court. I have gone through the same. From this report, it appears that question of clubbing the present case with another case has not been raised before the trial Court and that, the apprehension of the applicant, that there would be such clubbing and that, therefore, the trial would take another 8 to 10 months, does not appear to be well founded. 1/3

3.

The learned counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to the order dated 17 th January, 2013 passed by this Court in a previous bail application filed by the applicant. The learned counsel pointed out that the trial Court had been directed to complete the trial within a period of nine months from the date of the order, but that, still it is incomplete. The learned counsel expressed a grievance that the first informant has been adopting tactics to see that, the trial is delayed and that, the applicant remains in custody. He has attempted to point out the instances of such tactics, allegedly played by the first informant. 4.

Though there may be some substance in the grievance that due to the intervention of the first informant, the trial is being delayed, since the learned trial Judge has now expressed that the trial would be over within three months, I do not think it fit to release the applicant on bail in the background of the rejection/withdrawal of his three previous bail applications. 5.

The prayer of the learned counsel for the applicant to the effect that, in the event of the trial not being over within three months as estimated by the trial Court, the applicant may be released on bail, however, deserves consideration. 6.

The application is rejected.

2/3

7.

However, the trial Court should consider releasing the applicant on bail, should the trial be not over within a period of three months from today. In any event, liberty to the applicant to apply afresh for bail, should the trial be not over within the aforesaid period.

8.

The learned Judge shall proceed with the trial of the case, as far as possible, on day-to-day basis. 9.

Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (ABHAY M. THIPSAY J.) 3/3