Nagpur: More frameworks fall in a case where the Nagpur bench from the Bombay High Court ordered an investigation into lawyers for allegedly suppressing facts when submitting a guarantee application accused.
According to the report submitted by the main district and the Judge (PDJ) session to HC, the lawyer in question does not have a Vakalatnama of the Ramteke Swapist Applicant, or from his brother.
PDJ in his report also said that he interrogated the lawyer accused, who claimed that the accused of brothers had given him oral instructions to submit the second guarantee application, without mentioning the first facts rejected by Judge RR Patare on March 19, 2021.
Justice Deo then verbally told Ramteke’s advice Mir Nagman Ali to submit a detailed written statement about whether the Petitioner’s brother had instructed a lawyer to apply for the second guarantee application.
The trial was then postponed for a week.
Toi has been on Friday submitting a detailed report on HC spraying lawyers to suppress facts while submitting the second guarantee application from the Defendant who was delayed before another SR Trivedi judge.
Applicants were ordered based on Section 376 along with the protection of children from sexual violations (Pocso) acting by the Wathoda police station last year for allegedly raping a 13-year-old girl on July 12.
He moved HC after his first pleasure plea was canceled on March 19, 2021.
Then, discussed that the applicant had submitted the second guarantee application before other judges while pressing that his first application was rejected.
Judge Deo then asked the main judge to submit a photocopy of all the first and second bail requests submitted by Ramteke, and inform whether it was submitted without instructions and whether all facts were disclosed.
Lawyers submit a plead of plea without vactalatnama, said HC
