SALIM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(BOM)-2020-4-69
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on April 15,2020

SALIM Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) I have heard learned counsel for the applicant for some time. This is not an urgent matter requires hearing amid the outbreak of COVID 19, particularly during extended period of the lock down.
(2.) Though the matters at Sr. Nos. 1 to 16 on today's board and the matters at Sr. No. 40 to 51 (tendered in the Court today) have been filed seeking anticipatory bail, some of the matters are before notice (fresh matters) and some of the matters are after notice. It is not possible for the learned Public Prosecutor/Additional Public Prosecutor to make appropriate submissions for want of papers or otherwise in those applications, wherein notice has been given, though the record is received in some of the matters, considering bulky record it is not possible for the learned Public Prosecutor/Additional Public Prosecutor to make appropriate submission in each of such matter in a time frame manner. It is necessary to mention here that sitting of this Court is only for two hours i.e. between 12.00 noon to 2.00 p.m.
(3.) Otherwise also, there is no adequate staff available in this Court today. Thus with the help of Sheristedar, a hand written board of today's matters has been prepared. Even though the matters are decided to be taken up for hearing by video conferencing, unfortunately, the system failed and as such, the video conferencing is not possible today. I am thus required to come on the Dias. Out of all 39 matters which are on today's hand written board, the matters at Sr. Nos. 1 to 16 on today's board and the matters at Sr. No. 40 to 51 (tendered in the Court today) are anticipatory bail applications.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.