Yash @ Tarun Hari Godariya v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Pso Imambada Nagpur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1020 OF 2024 (Yash @ Tarun Hari Godariya Vs. State of Maharashtra) AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1201 OF 2024 (Niraj @ Banty Santoshkumar Gupta Vs. State of Maharashtra) AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1222 OF 2024 (Mr. Sandesh s/o Ullhas Jadhav Vs. State of Maharashtra) AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.58 OF 2025 (Sheikh Sohel Sheikh Sajid and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.) AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.105 OF 2025 (Suresh @ Suraj Shivdas Chaugule Vs. State of Maharashtra) AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.109 OF 2025 (Nilesh Prakash Paunikar Vs. State of Maharashtra) AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.15 OF 2025 (Rekha w/o Rupdeo Dhote Vs. State of Maharashtra) AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.56 OF 2025 (Vishal s/o Vikram Narote Vs.
State of Maharashtra) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM:- URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED :- FEBRUARY 13, 2025 The applications are filed for grant of regular bail and the anticipatory bail.
2.
Mr. D.V. Chauhan, learned Public Prosecutor (Senior Counsel) for the State pointed out the recent order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Writ Petition
(Criminal) No.55/2025 dated 07/02/2025 wherein the observation of the Hon'ble Court in paragraph Nos.11 to 15 are relevant.
3.
The Hon'ble Apex Court observes as under:
"11. This would ensure that there is a consistency in the views taken by the learned judge in different bail applications arising out of the same FIR.
12. However, if on account of change of the roster, the learned judge who was earlier dealing with the bail matters is not taking up the bail matters, the aforesaid directions would not be applicable.
13. Further, we expect that in order to maintain consistency in the views taken by the Court, the learned judge, who will hear the subsequent applications filed for bail, may give due weightage to the views taken by the earlier judge, who had dealt with the bail applications arising out of the same FIR.
14. We find that if this is not followed and if the judges siting in the Division Bench or thereafter taking up different assignments are required to take up the applications arising out of the same FIR, it may further delay the decisions in the bail matters.
15. The Registrar (Judl.) is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Registrar Generals of all the High Courts."
4.
In view of the observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court, Registrar (Judicial) shall take note of this and seek appropriate directions from the Principal Seat as far as the assignments of the subsequent bail applications are concerned.
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) *Divya