Raj Santosh Koli v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

925-BA.1969-22.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 925 BAIL APPLICATION NO.1969 OF 2022 RAJ SANTOSH KOLI

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Patil Atmaram J., Mr. Parde Anil Balajirao.

APP for Respondent-State : Mr. S. P. Deshmukh. Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Ms. Jagtap Manjusha S. (Appointed).

...

CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.

DATE : 05.01.2023 PER COURT :- 1.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned APP for the respondent-State and learned counsel appointed for respondent No.2/victim.

2.

The victims were 6 and 7 years old. The applicant is recently got admission in engineering college. He prays the Court to save his educational career. However, the learned APP and the learned counsel for the victim argued that considering the age of the victims and nature of the offence, it would be inappropriate to release the applicant on bail. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that the charge has already been framed. The case is likely to open and finish at the

925-BA.1969-22.odt earliest. In the circumstances, the Court is of the view that to protect the interest of all, the learned Trial Court may be directed to expedite the trial subject to the co-operation of the accused. Hence, learned Trial Court dealing with the trial is requested to expedite the trial and possibly within three (3) months from the receipt of this order subject to full cooperation from both sides.

3. It is made clear that non completion of the trial within three (3) months would not be a ground for bail again. 4.

With the above directions, the application stands disposed of.

5.

The Secretary, High Court Legal Services, SubCommittee, Aurangabad do pay the legal fees to the appointed advocate for Respondent No.2 as per the schedule. (S. G. MEHARE, J.) ...

vmk/-