The High Court of Bombay disposed of a criminal writ petition challenging club activities. Relying on an affidavit stating no license was insisted upon and no directions for closure were given, the court held nothing survived and dismissed the petition.
The criminal writ petition was disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.136 OF 2005
Shri Uday Bhimrao Shewale .... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & others .... Respondents
Ms Kumud A. Bhatia for the Petitioner.
Shri S.R. Shinde, A.P.P., for the Respondents.
CORAM: R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR &
P.V. KAKADE, JJ.
DATED: MARCH 14, 2005
P.C:
Heard. Perused the affidavit filed on behalf of
the respondents by PSI B.S. Jadhav of Laxmipuri Police
Station, Kolhapur wherein it has been categorically
stated on oath that:-
"I state that even as on today the
activities of the said club are going
on. I state that we have never given
any oral directions for closer of the
said club and we are taking action
according to law and at no point of time
we insisted for licence under the
provisions of the Bombay Police Act."
In view of the said statement, which we accept, nothing
[2]
survives in the petition and the petition is accordingly
disposed of.
(R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.)
(P.V. Kakade, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal writ petition survives the affidavit filed by the respondents' police officer.
Shri Uday Bhimrao Shewale
State of Maharashtra
R.M.S. Khandeparkar
P.V. Kakade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court