Abhishek Kumar Rampratap Singh v. The State Of Maharashtra

1 / 3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.233 OF 2021 Abhishek Kumar Rampratap Singh .... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent WTIH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.378 OF 2021 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.233 OF 2021 Pragati Anil Singh .... Intervenor

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :

Abhishek Kumar Rampratap Singh .... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent .......

• Ms.Anjali Patil, Advocate for Applicant.

• Mr.Ashish Uttam Singh, Advocate for Intervenor. • Mrs.Veera Shinde, APP for the State/Respondent.

CORAM

: SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 17th DECEMBER, 2021 P.C. :

Digitally signed by MANUSHREE V NESARIKAR Date:

2021.12.21 17:46:50 +0530 MANUSHREE V NESARIKAR 1.

This is the second bail application preferred by the same Applicant. On the earlier occasion, he had approached this Nesarikar

2 / 3 Court vide Criminal Bail Application (ST) No.2167 of 2020, which was disposed of vide order dated 18/09/2020 with the following order -:

"1.

After arguing for some time, when I expressed my disinclination to grant relief in this matter, the learned counsel for the applicant prays for unconditional withdrawal of this application. Her only request was that, she should be given liberty to file this application after some time. At this stage, I am not inclined to grant this particular liberty. After I expressed my disinclination to grant that liberty, the learned counsel for the applicant then prays for unconditional withdrawal of this application. 2.

Permission is granted.

3.

The application is allowed to be withdrawn unconditionally and is disposed of as such."

2.

Today same Applicant has preferred this application. The learned counsel for the Applicant has not pointed out any

3 / 3 change in circumstance except submitting that the Applicant wants to approach Supreme Court and therefore some reasons are invited. On the last occasion, the Applicant had extensively argued the matter, which is noted in the earlier order. The Applicant was allowed to withdraw the matter unconditionally. Therefore I am not entertaining this application, as there is no change in the circumstance. There is sanctity attached to the statement made before this Court for unconditional withdrawal. 3.

The application is therefore disposed of as rejected. 4.

The Interim Application is also disposed of.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)