Bombay High Court Building. Photo: bombayhighcourt.nic.in
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (August 27, 2024) urged lower courts to expeditiously dispose of anticipatory bail pleas to protect the liberty of citizens. The High Court expressed its dismay at the slowness with which a sessions court in Kalyan in Maharashtra's Thane district dealt with a pre-arrest bail plea.
A single bench of Justice Sandeep V Marne was hearing an appeal filed by Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde faction) leader Viman Mahatre, who approached the High Court with complaints, claiming that the sessions court had earlier The arrestee is neither hearing the bail application. filed on August 22, 2024, nor was he granted interim protection in the case. He also claimed that the sessions court had adjourned his plea on several occasions and fixed the hearing on August 29, 2024.
The Shiv Sena leader is accused of making derogatory remarks against a woman journalist during a recent protest in Badlapur area of Thane district over the rape of two girls in a kindergarten. Mr Mahatre was booked on Thursday (August 22, 2024) under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. On approaching the sessions court for anticipatory bail, he said the court had ignored his plea, forcing him to appeal to the High Court for relief.
Disposing of the appeal as the Sessions Court is yet to take a decision in the matter, Justice Marne directed the Kalyan Sessions Court judge to decide on Mr. Mahatre's plea on August 29 itself and submit a report by the same evening.
“If the lower courts do not decide such cases, then the High Court is burdened with such cases. They should decide. The problem is that they are not decided. When the question of civil liberties is involved, it is important that An anticipatory bail application should be taken up and decided, either finally or at least to grant interim protection.A report on the status of the anticipatory bail application to the Registry of the High Court will appear before the department on the evening of August 29 itself,” observed Justice Marne.
The Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the reason for adjourning the hearing to the Sessions Court was that the female journalist, the complainant in the case, had sought time to respond to Mr. Mahatre's request. The public prosecutor also assured the political leader that the police would not take any coercive action against him till the final verdict of the sessions court.