VAIBHAV YADAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for the respondent- State of Maharashtra and perused the petition papers.

(2.) This Court, while directing notice to the respondent-State on 2/2/2022, considering all aspects of the matter, had granted interim protection against arrest of the petitioner.

(3.) Though the learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that keeping in view the nature of the offence alleged against the petitioner, he is not entitled to the benefit of interim bail, in any event, there is no serious contention that the petitioner has not participated in the process of investigation as and when the petitioner was required to attend the process. Be that as it may, notwithstanding the continuation of the interim protection granted to the petitioner, the petitioner is required to attend the investigation process as and when summoned.