HC sets aside Raj Thackeray's bail, asks him to surrender | india | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Dec 07, 2016-Wednesday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

HC sets aside Raj Thackeray's bail, asks him to surrender

india Updated: Jun 16, 2009 21:32 IST

Highlight Story

Observing that the custodial interrogation of MNS chief Raj Thackeray in a 2008 case of rioting at Kalyan will not serve any purpose, the Bombay High Court today set aside bail granted to him and asked him to surrender before a Railway court on June 29.

Hearing the state government's appeal challenging interim anticipatory bail granted to Raj, Justice Rekha Sondurbaldota observed that the custodial interrogation was not necessary at this stage.

Upholding the state government's contention that Kalyan sessions court's order granting Raj anticipatory bail had become infructuous as he had already been arrested by Railway Police, the High Court quashed the lower court order granting interim protection to the MNS leader.

Raj's lawyer Ashok Mundargi said, "The issue raised in the state's appeal before the High Court was technical and getting bail for Raj from the Railway court will only be a formality."

The matter pertains to assault by MNS workers on North Indian youths who had come to Kalyan for Railway recruitment examination on October 19 last year.

Raj was arrested and produced before a Kalyan magistrate on October 22 who sent him to judicial custody.

While his bail plea was being heard, GRP urged the magistrate to grant Raj's transit remand for producing him before a railway court in a similar case.

After transit remand was granted, GRP took Raj's custody. However, Raj's lawyers simultaneously had moved a Kalyan sessions court (located in the same premises) with an anticipatory bail application in GRP case and he got interim protection from arrest from that court.

When Raj's anticipatory bail was being heard by Kalyan sessions court, he got interim bail for two days till October 24.

When Magistrate (hearing Thackeray's remand) was told about the development in sessions court, he recalled his order (granting remand to GRP), saying that it was "clerical error".

The government moved High Court, saying that magistrate could not have recalled his earlier order giving Raj's custody to GRP.