Bombay High Court
Koushik Drubananda Chatterjee vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21 May, 2019
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
Seema 1/2 906. aba-1143 of 2019.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1143 of 2019 Mr. Koushik D. Chatterjee .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ……
Mr. B. G. Tangsali I/b Prabha Uday Badadare, Advocates for the Applicant.
Mr. J. P. Yagnik, APP for the Respondent – State.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J (VACATION COURT) DATED : 21st MAY, 2019.
1) The applicant is apprehending his arrest and therefore seeking Anticipatory bail in connection with C.R. No. 96 of 2019 registered at Nigadi Police Station, District Pune under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471 of IPC.
2) The applicant’s Anticipatory Bail Application was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge Pune, vide his order dated::: Uploaded on – 21/05/2019 ::: Downloaded on – 22/05/2019 03:15:01 ::: Seema 2/2 906. aba-1143 of 2019.doc 07.05.2019. Further, the ad-interim protection which was granted to him was extended till 20.05.2019. Today when matter was called out the investigating officer is not present to give instructions to the Learned APP. The order passed by the Sessions Court also indicates that the investigating officer was not present before that Court during the hearing of the Anticipatory Bail Application. To put it mildly, the attitude of investigating officer is not proper. However, to give one more chance to the investigating officer, to remain present with the investigating papers, the matter is adjourned to 27.05.2019. The interim protection granted by Additional Sessions Judge, Pune is extended till 27.05.2019. It is made clear that if the investigating officer does not remain present before this Court then the Court may consider taking stern action against the investigating officer.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)::: Uploaded on – 21/05/2019 ::: Downloaded on – 22/05/2019 03:15:01 :::