Hanmant Vishnu Mulik v. Pravin Balaso Yedke And ANR

911-APPLN-90-2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 90 OF 2021 Hanmant Vishnu Mulik ...Applicant

Versus

Pravin Balaso Yedke & Anr.

...Respondents

....

Mr. Yash Fadtare i/by Mr. Nitesh Mohite, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs. Savita Yadav, APP for the Respondent - State. ....

CORAM

:

ANIL S. KILOR, J.

DATE :

19th JULY, 2024.

P.C.

:

1.

In this application, the informant is seeking cancellation of bail granted by the trial Court vide Order dated 21st September,2019. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that the order is perverse and before filing of the charge-sheet, the bail was granted.

2.

I have gone through the order granting bail to the Respondent/Accused. The learned trial Court has considered the fact that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and considering the material collected by the Investigating Officer by SUNNY ANKUSHRAO THOTE Date:

2024.07.20 14:00:00 +0530 during the investigation, after recording the detailed reasons the SUNNY ANKUSHRAO THOTE application was allowed.

SUNNY THOTE

911-APPLN-90-2021.doc 3.

Thus, considering the fact that the ultimate conclusion arrived at by the trial Court is just and proper, only on the ground that the bail granted before filing of the charge-sheet, this application cannot be allowed. Moreover, after grant of bail the period of five years has been lapsed and during this period there is no complaint of misuse of liberty by the Respondent No.1. 4.

In the circumstances, I do not find any merit in these matters, accordingly the application is rejected. (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) SUNNY THOTE