Sanjit Jayprakash Taak v. The State Of Maharashtra

1/2 05 BA-2372.21.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2372 OF 2021 Sanjit Jayprakash Taak ] ... Applicant Vs.

State of Maharashtra ] ... Respondent ...

Mr.Manoj M. Gadkari for the Applicant.

Mrs.Veera Shinde, A.P.P. for the Respondent/State. PSI Shri Mahesh Abnave attached to Daund Police Station, present.

...

CORAM

: SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.

DATED : 08TH APRIL, 2022.

P.C. :- 1.

This is a second bail application, the first being permitted to be withdrawn as the Court was not inclined to entertain the same and it was withdrawn on 07/01/2021, reserving liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application if the trial does not commence within a period of six months.

M.M.Salgaonkar

2/2 05 BA-2372.21.doc The aforesaid liberty constrained the applicant to approach this Court.

2.

On appreciation of evidence, I cannot persuade myself to release the applicant on bail, looking to the nature of accusations and the specific role attributed to him.

3.

The charge-sheet, being filed in the month of July, 2018 and, down the line almost three and half years, the charge is not yet framed. The learned APP states that the matter is now fixed on 13/04/2022 for framing of charge.

On the said date, the learned Judge shall frame the charge. It is the duty of the Court to ensure speedy trial, particularly when no reasoning is coming forward as to why the charge is not being framed.

The aforesaid direction shall be communicated to the concerned A.P.P., who shall bring it to the notice of the learned Judge. Failure to frame the charge, as directed above, shall be construed as failure to abide by the directions issued by this Court. Upon the charge being framed, every endeavour shall be made to schedule the trial expeditiously.

4.

The application is rejected.

[SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.] M.M.Salgaonkar