Salam @ Wasim Mohd Bashir Mohd Mansuri v. The State Of Maharashtra

1/2 2 BA 3368-22.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3368 OF 2022 Salam @ Wasim Mohd. Bashir Mohd.

Mansuri ..

Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ..

Respondent ...

Mr. Aniket Vagal a/w Mr. Kunal Pednekar, Divesh Mehani for the applicant.

Mr. S.R.Agarkar, APP for the State.

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.

DATED : 24th APRIL 2023 P.C:- The second bail application is filed in the wake of the liberty being conferred upon the applicant by order dated 7/5/2021. The learned counsel Mr. Vagal would submit that as on date, 30 witnesses are examined and approximately 10 to 12 witnesses as per prosecution need to be examined. Mr. Vagal is justified in submitting that the appellant is arrested since 2018 and is incarcerated. He is conscious of the position that the offence invoked is under the provisions of MCOC Act, but his only submission is that the recording of the remaining witnesses shall be expeditiously concluded. Ashish

2/2 2 BA 3368-22.doc I find myself in agreement with the submission of Mr. Vagal. Long incarceration of five years of the applicant justify the expeditious conclusion of the trial, in which he is facing the charge under the MCOC Act and as well as certain other provisions of IPC, which include section 120-B. The Special Judge therefore, is requested to expeditiously conclude the examination of the remaining witness and preferably by recording the evidence on day-to-day basis, in any case, within period of 3 months from today i.e. by 31/08/2023. The learned Judge shall conclude the examination of the witnesses. Needless to state that if the applicant want the witnesses to be examined in a time bound manner, he as well as his counsel shall render cooperation to the learned Judge. Application stand disposed off.

( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.) Ashish