Pradip Annasaheb Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra

Tilak 1/2 (12)BA-343-15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.343 OF 2015 Pradip Annasaheb Patil .. Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ­­­ Mr.Dilip Bodake, Advocate for the applicant.

Mrs.Anamika Malhotra, APP for the Respondent State. ­­­ CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.

DATED : 5th MAY, 2015 ­­­ P.C. :

Heard Mr.Dilip Bodake, learned counsel for the applicant. Heard Mrs.Anamika Malhotra, learned APP for the State.

It is not in dispute that the trial has already commenced, and the First Informant has already been examined as a witness. Though this was clear on the last date itself, on the suggestion of the learned Senior Advocate, this application was kept pending so as to see whether any further delay takes place in holding the trial. This was necessary because of the past conduct of the First Informant who was, allegedly, responsible for causing delay in holding the trial.

Tilak 2/2 (12)BA-343-15 Today, the same prayer is repeated i.e. that the Bail Application be kept pending. I am not inclined to adopt such a course. The Bail Application cannot be kept pending indefinitely just because the applicant apprehends that in the event of bail application being disposed of, the trial will again be delayed. Application is rejected.

However, the trial court shall ensure that the trial is completed by 31st August 2015, and report compliance to this Court.

(ABHAY M.THIPSAY, J)