Akil Ahmed Ansari v. Union Of India And ANR

921.BA.3940.24.doc Ajay IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3940 OF 2024 Akil Ahmed Ansari .. Applicant

Versus

Union of India and Anr.

.. Respondents ....................

 Mr. Advait Tamhankar, Advocate for Applicant.  Mr. Rushikesh Munde, Special PP for Respondent No.1 - Union of India (DRI).

 Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for Respondent No.2 - State. ....................

CORAM

: MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : APRIL 03, 2025.

P.C.:

1.

I have heard Mr. Tamhankar, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr. Munde, learned Special PP for Respondent No.1 - Union of India (DRI) and Ms. Bajoria, learned APP for Respondent No.1 - State at length and perused the record of the case. 2.

After hearing the submissions and perusing the record of the case, I expressed my mind to Mr. Tamhankar that this Court is not inclined to grant the Bail Application. In his usual fairness on instruction he would persuade the Court to permit him to withdraw the present Bail Application without making any observations on merits.

921.BA.3940.24.doc 3.

Mr. Tamhankar would persuade the Court to consider passing directions to expedite the trial considering the fact that Applicant is incarcerated for more than 2 years and 4 months. That undoubtedly the Court can do and pass appropriate directions. 4.

The learned Trial Court is directed by this this Court to expedite the trial and complete the same as expeditiously as possible. 5.

In view of the above, Bail Application is allowed to be withdrawn with the above directions.

6.

Bail Application is disposed as withdrawn.

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Ajay by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date:

2025.04.04 11:12:53 +0530 AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE