Disposed

Mukund Govind Kulkarni v. Gajanan Shankar Pakale and Anr.

Bombay HC28 Jun 2005WP/187/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the petitioner has an efficacious remedy of preferring revision against the order of the Magistrate issuing process. Consequently, the criminal writ petitions were not entertained on merits and were disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to prefer revision; trial court directed not to proceed for three weeks; writ petitions disposed.

Mukund Govind Kulkarni Vs Gajanan Shankar Pakale and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

 (-1-)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 187 OF 2005
 ALONGWITH
 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 188 OF 2005

¶4

 Mukund Govind Kulkarni ...Petitioner

¶5

 Versus

¶6

 Gajanan Shankar Pakale & Anr ...Respondents

¶7

 Mr. I.M. Khairdi, Advocate for Petitioner

¶8

 Mr. Y.S. Shinde, A.P.P. for State.

¶9

CORAM:SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.

¶10

DATED: 28TH JUNE, 2005

¶11

P. C.:-

¶12

 1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and
 the learned A.P.P. for the State. Leave to amend.
 Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

¶13

 2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of process
 issued against him in S.T.C. No. 1736 of 2001 and
 S.T.C. No. 1445 of 2001 which are pending in the
 Court of learned J.M.F.C. Karad. In the said case,
 process has been issued against the petitioner under
 Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶14

 3. For the reasons recorded in my order dated 13th
 June, 2005 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.213 of

¶15

 (-2-)

¶16

 2005 and order dated 21st June, 2005 passed in
 Criminal Application No.550 of 2005, the petitioner
 has an efficacious remedy of preferring revision
 against the order of Magistrate issuing process.
 Hence, in my view, it would be appropriate that the
 petitioner prefers revision before the concerned
 Sessions Court against the order of the Magistrate
 issuing process.

¶17

 4. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to prefer
 revision before the concerned Sessions Court. The
 trial Court shall not proceed with the trial for a
 period of three weeks from today.

¶18

 5. On the necessary revision being preferred by the
 petitioner before the concerned Sessions Court, the
 concerned Sessions Court shall dispose of the same on
 merits after hearing necessary parties.

¶19

 6. Criminal writ petitions are disposed of.

¶20

 *****

Mukund Govind Kulkarni v. Gajanan Shankar Pakale and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukund Govind Kulkarni v. Gajanan Shankar Pakale and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anilkumar Laxmanrao Alkunthe and Ors. Vs Amarnath Laxmanrao Alkunthe and Anr.

Roshanlal Jagannath Soni Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sundeep Ploymers Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs M/S. K.M. Enterprises and Anr.

Mukund Govind Kulkarni Vs Gajanan Shankar Pakale and Anr.

Poonam Sanjay Agarwal Vs Aggarwal Corporation and Anr.

Poonam Sanjay Agarwal Vs M/S. Aggarwal Corporation and Anr.