Ganesh @ Shubham Tukaram Pawar v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

908-ba-3904-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.3904 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2414 OF 2024 Ganesh @ Shubham Tukaram Pawar ...

Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and Anr.

...

Respondents ------------------- Mr. Tapan Thatte with Vivek Arote and Akshay DIngale, for the applicant.

Ms. Geeta Mulekar, APP, for the Respondent / State. Mr. S.S. Ambedkar, for the respondent no. 2.

API, Snehal Thorat, Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, Pune, Present. --------------------

CORAM

:

ANIL S. KILOR, J.

DATE :

28TH NOVEMBER, 2024.

PC:

1.

After hearing for sometime and when this Court was not inclined to grant bail, learned counsel for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw the present application. 2.

Permission is granted.

3.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant points out that despite the mandate of Section 35 of the POCSO, Act, in last 6 years not a single witness has been examined. Whereas, there are 24 witnesses.

varsha

908-ba-3904-2024.doc 4.

Accordingly, the learned counsel for the applicant pressed for direction to the trial Court to expedite the trial. 5.

Considering, the mandate of Section 35 of POCSO, Act and the fact that till date not a single witness has been examined. The trial Court shall endeavour to conclude the trial as per the mandate of Section 35 of the POCSO, Act, at the earliest. 6.

Liberty is granted to the applicant if the trial is not concluded within 6 months, to apply afresh on the ground of long period of incarceration as well as on merit.

7.

The learned counsel for the applicant undertakes to place this copy of the order on the record of the trial Court within two weeks from today.

8.

Bail application is disposed of as withdrawn. (ANIL S. KILOR, J) varsha