Ajit Dyaneshwar Ingle v. The State Of Maharashtra

rsk 1/2 39-WP-3961-19.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3961 OF 2019 Ajit Dyaneshwar Ingle

...Petitioner

vs.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

---- Mr.Rushikesh Kale i/b V. V. Purwant for the Petitioner. Smt. Aruna S. Pai, APP for the Respondent/State. ---- CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & N. R. BORKAR, JJ.

DATE : 5/2/2020.

P.C.:

.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused order passed by learned Single Judge on 3/10/2019 and report submitted by trial Court on 11/10/2019. It appears that original accused Nos.3 and 6 were absconding and hence trial was required to be separated by following section 299 of Cr.P.C. However, they appeared later on and their advocate was permitted to cross examine the prosecution witnesses. No charge has been framed against accused Nos.3 and 6 at all. 2.

Thereafter accused Nos.1 and 5 are absconding and therefore again trial has been held up.

3.

Grievance of the present petitioner (accused No.2) is that though he is regularly appearing before trial Court, he is made to suffer. Learned counsel states that the FIR is of the year 2009 and charge is framed.

rsk 2/2 39-WP-3961-19.doc 4.

Only one witness has been examined and there is no further progress.

5.

Charge is under sections 408, 409, 420, 465, 466, 467, 471 read with 34 of IPC.

6.

It appears that there are 7 accused persons. In this situation, it will be in the interest of justice if trial Court expedites the matter and proceeds further by following section 299 of Cr.P.C. 7.

We direct trial Court to attempt to complete the trial against available accused persons within next one year. 8.

With this direction, we dispose of the present petition. (N. R. BORKAR, J.) (B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)