This court heard and perused specific paragraphs of the judgment under appeal. It accepted the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge's view as possible and discharged the application, declining to interfere.
The application is rejected.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2149 OF 2007
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2007
The State of Maharashtra ] .. Applicant
(Ori.Complainant)
Versus
Shej Jamnya Bhosale ] .. Respondent
(Ori.Accused)
Mr. A.S. Gadkari, APP, for the applicant.
CORAM: S.B. MHASE &
SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ.
DATED: 19TH NOVEMBER, 2007
P.C. :
1. Heard.
2. We have perused paragraphs No.24 to 27 of the
judgment dated 28th March, 2007. The view expressed by
the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge is a possible view.
3. Application is rejected.
Sd/- Sd/-
[SMT V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] [S.B. MHASE, J.]
The State of Maharashtra
Shej Jamnya Bhosale
S.B. MHASE
V.K. TAHILRAMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court