Deepak Khubchand Bajaj And Another v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Anti Cooruption Bureau Administrative Building No.1 Nagpur And Another

revn184.16.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 184/2016 Deepak Khupchand Bajaj and another ..vs. The State of Maharashtra thr. ACB Nagpur and anr. _____________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr. S. S. Voditel, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. N. B. Jawade, A.P.P. for non applicant-State CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATED :

JUNE 16, 2017 The present revision is directed against the framing of charge by the learned Special Judge (ACB), Nagpur in Special (ACB) Case No. 4/2016.

Heard Mr. S. S. Voditel, learned counsel for the applicant in extenso.

According to the learned counsel, charge nos. 1 and 7 are contradictory to each other. After framing of the charge, the matter is now fixed for evidence. In the present case, the applicant, who was the President of Sindhu Education Society and also Head Master, initially approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail which was rejected by this Court and thereafter he carried the matter to the Hon'ble Apex court, which was also rejected. However, the Hon'ble Apex Court granted some time for surrender and accordingly, the applicant has surrendered. The applicant, thereafter, again preferred applications for regular bail before the Sessions Court, this Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court, however, the same have been rejected.

Once the charge is framed, it is the bounden duty of the Court to proceed with the matter. A perusal of the charge

revn184.16.odt framed by the trial Court is in conformity with the statement of assertion made by the prosecution.

In view of above, I find no merit in the revision filed by the applicant. The same is therefore rejected. JUDGE kahale