Parimal Mukund Pawar v. The State Of Maharashtra

24- BA 208 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION No. 208 OF 2018 Mr. Parimal Mukund Pawar ...Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

****** Mr. Saurabh Butala i/b. Ms. Yashasvita Apte for Applicant Mr. Sayaji N. Nangre for Intervenor Mr. Vinod Chate -APP ****** CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.

DATE: JUNE 11, 2018 P.C.

1.

The learned APP submits that in the present case the trial has commenced and examination-in-chief of the complainant is recorded. It is submitted that the defence has sought an adjournment on the ground that the present application under section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code is pending.

2.

The learned counsel for the Applicant has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 5th April, 2018, wherein the Hon'ble Court was of the opinion that it would be decided after the evidence of complainant is recorded. 3.

This Court is of the opinion that it would not be a proper course to follow V.A. Tikam 1/2

since the case rests on the circumstantial evidence and the complainant has only set the investigation into motion. This Court is of the view that it would not be possible to consider the application on merits. 4.

The Additional Sessions/ Ad-hoc District Judge No.1 at Ratnagiri, who seized with the Sessions Case No. 22 of 2017, is requested to expedite the trial and shall not grant any unwarranted adjournments to either of the parties. The learned Sessions Court shall make every endeavor to conclude the recording of evidence as far as possible within a period of eight weeks from today. Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. [SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.] V.A. Tikam 2/2