Surgani Vyankatesh S/O Raju Naidu v. State Of Maharashtra,Thr.Anti-Corruption Bureau,Ng
1 appa546.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.
CRMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.546 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.567 OF 2002 (Surgani Vyankatesh s/o Raju Naidu ..vs.. State of Maharashtra, through ACB, Nagpur) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri J.M. Gandhi, Advocate for applicant, Shri H.R. Dhumale, Addl.P.P. for non-applicant. CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH, J.
DATED : 08-12-2016 This application is for issuing direction to the learned trial Court to allow applicant to furnish fresh bail bond.
It is the case of applicant that vide order dated 25-07-2016, this Court directed applicant to furnish surety within a period of one week from the date of order, however, the writ of this Court reached late and since there were specific directions to learned trial Court to allow applicant to furnish surety within stipulated period, said order could not be complied with, and as such present application is preferred.
In the circumstances, as admittedly said writ was issued in compliance of bail granted to applicant/appellant, however, since applicant/appellant appears to have failed to furnish surety within stipulated
2 appa546.16 period, application is allowed.
Applicant is allowed to furnish surety before trial Court as per directions of this Court passed earlier. Time to furnish surety is accordingly extended by further period of two weeks from today.
Criminal Appeal No.567 of 2002.
Appeal be shown on board for final hearing.
JUDGE adgokar