1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3398 OF 2009 Mr. Daulat alias Gopa Bopani. ... Petitioner. V/s. State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent. Mr. Sandeep Waghmare for the Petitioner. Ms. R.V. Newton, APP for the State. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 25th JANUARY 2010. P.C. :- The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No.744 of 2009 has framed the charges in the absence of the Petitioner’s Advocate. 2. The matter before the Additional Sessions Judge was placed for framing charges but the Petitioner’s Advocate made a written application for adjournment on which the learned Judge passed an order allowing it. The adjournment was prayed from 30th November 2009 to 1st January 2010. However, the grievance is that after adjourning the matter, the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune on the very date on which he adjourned the matter, framed the charges. This has caused prejudice to the Petitioner. The Petitioner was desirous for applying for discharge from the proceedings. The course adopted by the learned Judge in the peculiar facts of this case has resulted in serious prejudice to him. 2 3. In these circumstances and the facts peculiar to this case, the order framing charge is set aside but on the condition that the Petitioner appears before the Trial Court on 8th February 2010. If the Petitioner is absent on that date, the learned Judge is free to proceed in his absence. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)