Pankaj S/O Baldeo Wankhede v. State Of Mah., Thr. Pso Wadi Dist Nagpur (Thr. Acp Nagpur)
ba1067.19 14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1067/2019 Pankaj s/o Baldeo Wankhede ..vs..
State of Mah., thr. PSO Wadi, Nagpur ................................................................................................................................................................... OfÏce Notes, OfÏce Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... Shri V.N.Patre, Counsel for the Applicant.
Shri V.A.Thakare, Addl.P.P. for the State.
CORAM
: V.M.DESHPANDE, J.
DATED : DECEMBER 06, 2019.
1.
This is an application for grant of bail.
2.
Heard learned counsel Shri V.N.Patre for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri V.A.Thakare for the State. Also, perused reply filed on behalf of the State.
3.
The applicant is arrested in connection with Crime No.93/2016 registered with Wadi Police Station, Nagpur for offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 324, 449, 143, 147, 148, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and under Section 3 of the MCOC Act.
4.
On 20.7.2016, chargesheet was filed. After filing of the chargesheet, the applicant approached twice before this Court by filing Criminal Application (BA) No.237/2018 and .....2/-
ba1067.19 14 this Court (Coram : S.B.Shukre, J.) on 25.4.2018, after hearing learned counsel for the applicant, allowed him to withdraw the application. Thereafter, another Criminal Application (BA) No.1143/2018 was filed and this Court (Coram : M.G.Giratkar, J.) on 15.2.2019 allowed learned counsel for the applicant to withdraw the application.
5.
Obviously, permission was sought to withdraw bail applications because the Court was not inclined to grant bail.
6.
The applicant has right to file successive bail applications. However, for filing of successive bail applications, it is incumbent upon applicant to show change in circumstance. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no change in circumstance.
7.
In this view of the matter, this Court is not going into merits and demerits of the case since those were considered on earlier two occasions by this Court. 8.
The criminal application stands rejected and disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE !! BRW !!
...../-