Raju Manika Yadav v. The State Of Maharashtra

1/2 13-ba.1957.2018.doc nsc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1957 OF 2018 Raju Manika Yadav ...Applicant

Versus

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr.Santosh Bhamre, for the Applicant.

Mr.V.V.Gangurde, A.P.P for the Respondent - State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

DATE : 13th JUNE, 2019 P.C. :

1.

At the outset, learned APP states on instructions, that the trial has commenced and till date 2 witnesses have been examined in the present case and that the prosecution intends to examine approximately 12 more witnesses. He further assures that all the said witnesses will be produced by the prosecution on the dates given by the trial Court. He states that the trial can be expedited and can be made time bound. 2.

Since the trial has commenced and 2 witnesses have already

2/2 13-ba.1957.2018.doc been examined, it would not be appropriate to consider the application of the applicant. However, the trial of the applicant is expedited. The learned Judge to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 9 months from the date of receipt of this order. If, for no fault of the applicant, the trial does not conclude within the said period, the applicant is at liberty to file a fresh application, which will be considered on its own merits.

3.

It is made clear, that this application has not been heard on merits.

4.

The Application is accordingly disposed of on the aforesaid terms.

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.