GAJANAN SHRIKANT OGALE vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Judgment text excerpt

LSP 1 5 alp 109.25.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Application No.109 of 2025 Manthan Kiran Bhosale … Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra … Respondents. With Interim Application No.633 of 2025 In Criminal Application No.109 of 2025 Gajanan Shrikant Ogale … Applicant- Intervenor In the matter between Manthan Kiran Bhosale … Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra … Respondents. Mr. Karma Vivan a/w. Mr. Tejas Advocates for the Applicant. Kothalikar, Ms. Isha Rakesh Singh, Advocate Neel Paralikar Mr. Aniket Nikam i/b.Mr. Sumit Advocate for the Intervenor. Patil Mr. C.D.Mali APP for the State. Mr. Manoj Kumar Pande API, Pimpri Sant Tukaram Nagar Police station. Digitally signed by LATA CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J LATA SUNIL SUNIL PANJWANI PANJWANI Date: DATE : 15th July 2025. 2025.07.23 17:00:12 +0530 ORAL JUDGMENT : The Intervention Application No.633/2025 filed on behalf of informant is allowed. LSP 2 5 alp 109.25.doc 2. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner/one of the accused involved in Sessions Case No.472/2023. Also heard learned Advocate Nikam for the first informant and learned APP appearing for the State. 3. The only issue raised in this petition is “about non-compliance of the provisions of Section 226 and 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.” Section 226 mandates the Prosecutor in-charge of the case to open up the prosecution case whereas Section 227 mandates the Court to hear both the sides and then to take a decision whether to frame the charge or not? 4. In this case, the trial Court has framed the charge on 18 th March 2024. It is for the offences punishable under Sections 302,363,364,364-A, 201 r/w Section 120B and Section 34 of IPC and under Section 66-C of the IT Act. 5. In order to buttress his submission