Krushna Vitthal Jadhav v. The State Of Maharashtra

936-ba-970-2023.odt (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO.970 OF 2023 KRUSHNA VITTHAL JADHAV

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Autade Vijay R APP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.P. Deshmukh ...

CORAM : S.G. MEHARE, J.

DATED : JULY 04, 2023 PER COURT:- 1.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.

2.

The applicant approached this Court for bail since the trial was not concluded within six months as per the order of this Court in Bail Application No.1113 of 2021 dated 04.12.2021. 3.

Learned APP would argue that instead of approaching the trial Court for bail after six months as per the order of this Court dated 04.12.2021, the applicant has directly approached this Court. There appears to be substance in his argument that each bail application shall be first filed before the trial Court. 4.

The progress report of the trial was called from the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur. His report reveals that he has misinterpreted the order of this Court dated 04.12.2021 and incorrectly observed that there were no directions to conclude the

936-ba-970-2023.odt (2) trial within six months. The order of this Court appears not seriously read. It was a convenient interpretation. Due care has not been taken. No time extension was sought. This Court is not satisfied with his report.

5.

In view of these facts, the learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave to approach the Sessions Court for bail afresh in view of the order of this Court dated 04.12.2021. 6.

Leave granted as prayed.

7.

The bail application filed, if any, shall be decided on merit.

8.

In the above terms, the application stands disposed of. (S.G. MEHARE, J.) Mujaheed//