Mukesh V. Jha (Applicant /Victim) And The Applicant v. The State Of Maharashtra

appp.396-2012.doc Dond

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 396 OF 2012 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO. 566 OF 2012 Mukesh V. Jha ... Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr ... Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 397 OF 2012 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO. 411 OF 2012 Mukesh V. Jha ... Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr ... Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 398 OF 2012 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO. 671 OF 2012 Mukesh V. Jha ... Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr ... Respondents ----- Mr. S.P. Kadam for Applicant.

Ms. Anamika Malhotra, APP for State.

---- 1/2

appp.396-2012.doc CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J.

DATE : 4th JANUARY 2018.

P.C.:

1] These are the applications for cancellation of bail by the first informant/injured witness in CR No.424 of 2008 registered with Bhandup Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 307, 324, 326, 452, 427, 143 to 149 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. After conclusion of the investigation, the same has now been culminated into Sessions Case Nos.744 of 2009 and 234 of 2012. 2] The learned Counsel appearing for the applicant fairly submitted that, as of today the trial pertaining to Sessions Case Nos.744 of 2009 and 234 of 2012 has already commenced and the first informant is in the witness box. In view of the above, I am not inclined to reevaluate the Order dated 26.4.2012 passed by this Court. All applications are accordingly disposed off.

3] It is however made clear that the observations made in the Order dated 26th April 2012 are in the context of deciding the said applications and the Trial Court may not get influenced by it at the time of conducting trial.

(A.S.GADKARI, J.) 2/2