IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 27 OF 2014 IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 21 OF 2014 TARUN TEJPAL Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH POLICE INSPECTOR CRIME BRANCH ... Applicant ... Respondent
Shri Raunaq Rao, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri S.D. Lotlikar, Special Public Prosecutor with Ms. M. Furtado, Advocate for the Respondent. Coram:- SMT. MRIDULA R. BHATKAR, J. Date:P.C.: 17th February, 2014
Application is moved by the applicant/accused that he wants to remain present in the Court at the time of the hearing of the bail application to instruct the Counsel while hearing the bail application.
2. Learned Special Public Prosecutor submits that it is expensive for the State to spend money to arrange the escort for his production in the High Court. Learned Special Public Prosecutor further submitted that his production for the hearing of the bail application may lead to a precedent.
3.
Heard Counsel of both the parties. The applicant/accused has
made application that he wants to attend the hearing of the bail
application and also give specific instructions to his Counsel at the time of the hearing of the application. Though, it is not a right of any accused to attend the Court at the time of hearing of bail, however, there is no bar in law to deny the application when accused wants to remain present and give specific instructions and assistance to his Counsel. It is not the case of the prosecution that the applicant is a hardcore criminal and so a very high degree security/escort is required. It is also the case that the applicant/accused was produced before the Sessions Court at the time of hearing of his bail and the Prosecutor did not object at that relevant time. Thus, in all fairness, in view of the fact situation, the applicant/accused is allowed to be produced for a day.
4.
Issue production warrant to the applicant/accused for tomorrow
i.e. 18/02/2014.
SMT. MRIDULA R. BHATKAR, J. NH
