Today, On 27th August, Justice Bharati Dangre of the Bombay High Court recused herself from the Sachin Waze case after having previously reserved the case for order. Justice Dangre, along with Justice Manjusha Deshpande, had extensively heard the arguments before the sudden withdrawal.
Mumbai: Justice Bharati Dangre of the Bombay High Court recused herself on Tuesday from hearing the petition filed by former Assistant Police Inspector Sachin Waze.
The petition challenges his detention related to a corruption case that also involves allegations against former Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh.
Read Also: Rajasthan HC Judge on ‘Overwhelming’ 1,600+ Cases in Single Day
This development occurred after Justice Dangre, alongside Justice Manjusha Deshpande, extensively heard the case and reserved their decision. However, Justice Dangre stepped down from handling the matter today, citing personal reasons.
Sachin Waze filed a petition seeking bail in the corruption case connected to Anil Deshmukh.
Sachin Waze asserted that he had been imprisoned for over two years without a chargesheet being filed against him, despite receiving a pardon from the special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court.
Waze was arrested by the CBI in 2022 on charges of allegedly collecting bribes on behalf of Anil Deshmukh from bar owners in Mumbai.
According to Waze, on June 1, 2022, the CBI granted approval under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for him to become an approver in the case. On the same day, the special CBI court accepted his request to be made an approver under the same section of the CrPC.
Read Also: SC Collegium Recommends Permanent Status for Five Karnataka HC Judges
In his petition, Waze contended that he was not listed as an accused in the chargesheet but rather as a witness. Despite this, his bail applications were repeatedly denied by the special court, while other accused individuals granted bail.
Waze is now seeking a directive from the High Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus, requesting that he be brought before the court due to what he claims is wrongful detention. He is also seeking release under Section 167(2) of the CrPC (default bail), as no chargesheet has been filed against him as an accused.