Shashank Purshottam Paranjape v. State Of Maharashtra

1/2 903 ABA 1827-22.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1827 OF 2022 Shashank Purshottam Paranjape ..

Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ..

Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1828 OF 2022 Shrikant Purshottam Paranjape ..

Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ..

Respondent ...

Mr. Ashok Mundargi, Sr. Advocate with Niranjan Mundargi i/b Amol Patankar and Vatsal Thakkar for the applicant in ABA 1827/2022.

Mr.Shirish Gupte, Sr. Advocate with Niranjan Mundargi i/b Amol Patankar for the applicant in ABA 1828/22. Mr.Prashant P. More for the intervenor.

Ms.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State.

API Avinash Rakshe in ABA 1827/22.

API Sachin Mandole in ABA 1828/22.

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.

DATED : 7th JULY, 2022 Tilak

2/2 903 ABA 1827-22.doc P.C:- The limited grievance made by the respective senior counsel in the two applications is to the effect that the applications are already filed before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Dindoshi Court, but on 1/7/2022, it is simply adjourned to 11/7/2022.

It is clear that when the Anticipatory Bail Applications are filed before the Sessions Court or before the High Court, it is imperative for the Court either to grant interim relief or to reject the applications. Long adjournments only on the ground that the say of the prosecution is sought for, is not the permissible mode in terms of the Maharashtra Amendment to Section 438.

It is expected that the Addl. Sessions Judge, on 11/7/2022, shall entertain the application or either grant adinterim relief or reject the application. Applications are disposed off.

( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.) Tilak