Bombay High Court
APPLN/4139/2007 of GANESH APPASO SHINDE Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA on 27 December 2007
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4139 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4139 OF 2007
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4139 OF 2007
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4139 OF 2007
Ganesh Appaso Shinde. .. Applicant.
vs.
State of Maharashtra. .. Respondent.
Mr. Ganesh Gole for Applicant.
Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP., for the State.
CORAM: J.N. PATEL, J.
CORAM: J.N. PATEL, J.(VACATION COURT)DATE: 27TH DECEMBER, 2007.
(VACATION COURT)
DATE: 27TH DECEMBER, 2007.
P.C.
. This is an application for pre-arrest bail by the suspect who is wanted for having committed offence under section 468, 262, 263, 420 and 511 of IPC
registered by C.R. No. 207/07 at the Miraj Police Station, District Sangli. In short, the case against the applicant is that he has purchased old used non-judicial stamp papers from the co-accused of the denomination of Rs. 100, 50, 20 and 10. The I.O. is present with the case diary. The Court has gone through the case diary and finds that there is enough material gathered by the police to show the complicity of the applicant in the offence. Considering the seriousness of the offence, custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary and, therefore, the Court is not inclined to entertain the application for pre-arrest bail.
2. The application is rejected.
(J.N. Patel, J.)
(J.N. Patel, J.)
(J.N. Patel, J.)