Vinod Janardhan Jadhav v. State Of Mah., Thr. Pso Tq Rajura Dist Chandrapur

aba697.19.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.697 OF 2019 Vinod Janardhan Jadhav .Vs. State of Maharashtra, PSO, P.S. Rajura, Tah. Rajura, Dist. Chandrapur.

_______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders of directions Court'

s or Judge'

s orders.

and Registrar'

s Orders.

Mr. S.V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. P.S. Tembhare, A.P.P. for non applicant-State. CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATED : NOVEMBER 05, 2019 Heard Mr. Sirpurkar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Tembhare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the non applicant-State. Also, perused the reply filed on behalf of the prosecuting agency. After perusal of the reply and after hearing the learned counsel for the applicant, I am of the view that present applicant is not entitled for any discretionary relief inasmuch as apart from the fact he is having four similar crimes, he has not attended the police station and has not cooperated the investigating agency as directed by this Court while granting ad interim anticipatory bail on 11.10.2019. The reply would show that the applicant has not cooperated with the investigating officer by not attending the investigating officer.

aba697.19.odt The person who has availed benefits of the order is required to adhere with the conditions imposed upon him.

Since the applicant is not attending the investigating officer, in my view, discretion cannot be granted in favour of such person.

The criminal application is rejected.

Needless to mention that interim relief granted on 11.10.2019 in favour of the applicant stands vacated. JUDGE srwagh