Angela Harish Sontakke v. The State Of Maharashtra

BA.1570.2014.902.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1570 OF 2014 Ms. Angela Harish Sontakke } Applicant versus State of Maharashtra } Respondent Mr. Sudip Pasbola i/b. Mr. Susan Abraham for the Applicant.

Ms. Rohini Salian Spl P. P. for the State.

CORAM :- S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.

DATED :- JANUARY 30, 2015 P.C. :- (In Chamber) Mr. Pasbola submits that the subsequent developments have been set out including the outcome of the proceedings other than the one, in which bail was denied. His argument is that in all other cases the Applicant/accused has been acquitted or discharged. In the case at hand, the prosecution has filed a list of witnesses and the number is

207. The trial is yet to commence. The Applicant is not likely to be released in the light of the earlier denial of bail, in near future. In such circumstances, the developments as noted would enable this Court to take into consideration the request for grant of bail. 2) Having perused this Application and all Annexures so also on hearing Mr. Pasbola I am not persuaded to accept the request made. J.V.Salunke,PA

BA.1570.2014.902.doc A detailed order on merits of the Bail Application has been passed. That cannot be recalled. The subsequent events and noted by me also do not enable me to pass a different order, when in the case at hand, the material discloses involvement and prima facie of the Applicant in offences, which are punishable with sentence running from 5 years rigorous imprisonment to imprisonment for life. In the above circumstances, merely because the trial is yet to commence, this is not a fit case for allowing or granting bail. The Application is dismissed. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) J.V.Salunke,PA