Ajinath Bala Bahir v. The State Of Maharashtra

921.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 921 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1893 OF 2017 AJINATH BALA BAHIR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Garud N.C.

APP for Respondent : Mr. A. R. Borulkar

CORAM

: K. L. WADANE, J.

DATE :

11th July, 2017 ORDER:

1.

Learned APP points out that similar bail application of the present applicant was already withdrawn by the applicant when the Court was inclined to grant relief in favour of the applicant. Now the applicant wants bail on the ground of delay. 2.

On perusal of the Report of the District Judge-7 and Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar dated 02.05.2017, it appears that the learned District Judge7, Ahmednagar, has informed the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court that Advocate Mr. Gopal Pande representing Accused No.1 is his office mate and therefore he has made representation to the Registrar Judicial of this Court to transfer the matter to any other Court. The learned Principal District Judge, Ahmednagar has forwarded his remarks that it has no 1/2

921.odt jurisdiction to transfer the Sessions case since it is part heard and posted for final argument. Further, it is seen from the record that evidence in the matter is completed and matter is posted for final argument. Therefore, it appears that it is hardly a matter of few days for the disposal of the representation by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar.

3.

In view of the above, the trial is as good as completed; only arguments are remained to be heard. Therefore, in such circumstances, I do not think that the applicant is entitled for bail. Hence the application is rejected.

(K. L. WADANE, J.) JPC 2/2