Allowed

Shantaram Waman Palekar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Sept 2005WP/1786/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal writ petition sought a direction to club together 28 complaints lodged against the petitioner and its directors at different police stations in Maharashtra for a common investigation by the State CID. The court ordered the clubbing of complaints and consideration of statements by the State CID.

What did the court decide?

Direction to club together 28 complaints lodged at various police stations in Maharashtra and carry out common investigation by the State CID.

Shantaram Waman Palekar Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

==============================================================

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1786 OF 2005

¶5

 ==============================================================
Mr. Chakor Mehta and R.B. Patil for the
petitioner.
Mr.D.R. More, A.P.P., for the respondent
-State

¶6

CORAM:S.S. PARKAR &
ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ.
DATED: 6TH SEPTEMBER, 2005.

¶7

P.C.:

¶8

. Heard.

¶9

2.There is no dispute that various
complaints have been lodged against the
petitioner by the investors at different Police
Stations at different places in Maharashtra, a
List of which is given in paragraphs 5.a and 6
of the Petition. The learned A.P.P. has
produced a list of 28 various complaints lodged
against the petitioner-company and its various
Directors at different places, which is taken
on record and marked Exhibit-"X" for
identification. Mr. More states that though

¶10

different complaints have been lodged at
different places and in different Police
Stations, the investigation in all the
complaints has been undertaken by the State
CID. The main prayer in this Petition is
seeking a direction to club together all the
complaints to be investigated by the State CID
by transferring the statements recorded by
different Police Stations to the State CID.
The prayer sought in the Petition is absolutely
reasonable and the respondent-State has already
entrusted the investigation of all the
complaints to the State CID.

¶11

3.In view of the above, we direct that all
the 28 complaints lodged at various Police
Stations in Maharashtra be clubbed together and
common investigation be carried on by the State
CID.

¶12

4.With the aforesaid directions, this
Petition shall stand disposed of.

¶13

[ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.]

Shantaram Waman Palekar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shantaram Waman Palekar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Dattatray Suryavanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nandlal S.Wadhwa Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arun Dattatray Suryavanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Altaf Shakoor Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Umesh B. Shetty Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sachin Vikram Bhandalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.