Anil Jaisinghani v. The State Of Maharashtra

1 199.17 abap

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 199 OF 2017 Anil Jaisinghani .....Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Vikram Chavan Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. P. P. Shinde APP for the State.

CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.

DATED : 1st FEBRUARY, 2017.

PC :

Not on board. Upon production, taken on board. 1) Heard. This is an application under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. On the earlier occasion this Court (Coram: A. S. Gadkari, J.) in Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1537 of 2016 was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant. Application was withdrawn with liberty to approach the Court of Magistrate, however, till today, applicant has not approached the Court of Magistrate. Similar offences are registered against him at Goa and Ahmedabad. This Court has granted interim relief in favour of the applicant on humanitarian grounds, however, the same ism

2 199.17 abap cannot be taken as blanket order to enable the applicant to approach the Court at Goa or Ahmedabad since no faith can be reposed in the applicant. 2) The learned APP has vehemently submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant abiding by any conditions as he would take disadvantage of blanket order. In the course of hearing, upon query made by this Court, the learned counsel has submitted that in fact, wife of the applicant expired on 31/01/2017, however, the death certificate shows that she has expired on 01/02/2017. Applicant had not approached the Court of Sessions. It is in these circumstances that this Court is not inclined to grant transit bail to the applicant as there is no guarantee that the applicant would approach the respective courts within the stipulated time. 3) Hence, application being sans merits, stands rejected. (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.) ism