NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR v. State of Maharashtra, through AGP Malkapur for Nandura Police Station
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
The application is disposed of as withdrawn
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. The application is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh application.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 13 OF 2025 Suraj Vilas Tayade Vs. State of Maharashtra, through AGP Malkapur for Nandura Police Station Nandura District Buldhana and another -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Court's or Judge's orders Mr. S. V. Sirpurkar, Counsel for the applicant. Mr. Jameel Khan, APP for the non-applicant No.1/State. Mr. Abuzain Tarique Sheikh, appointed Counsel for non-applicant No.2. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J. DATED : 09/06/2025
The application is for grant of bail.
Learned Counsel for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw the application with liberty to file fresh application as the issue regarding the non-compliance of Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court.
Operative part
The application is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh application.
The fees of the appointed Counsel be quantified as per rules. (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) Sarkate
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The application is disposed of as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 50.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 09 Jun 2025. The bench was URMILA JOSHIPHALKE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.