The High Court held that under amended Section 378(1) of Cr.P.C., the application for leave to appeal must be heard and decided by the Sessions Court. It directed the transfer of the application to the Sessions Court at Nasik.
Registrar directed to transfer the application to the Sessions Court at Nasik.
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.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3845 OF 2005
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2005
------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Court’s or Judge’s
Memoranda of Coram, orders
appearance, Court’s
orders or directions
and Registrar’s orders
------------------------------------------------------
Mr. S.R. Shinde, APP for
applicant-State.
CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE,J.
27/08/2007.
P.C.:
. After the delay was condoned this
application for leave to appeal has
come up for admission.
. In view of the amended scheme of
Section 378(1) of Cr.P.C. the
application for leave to appeal in the
instant case is required to be heard
and decided by the Sessions Court.
. Hence, the Registrar (Judicial)
is directed to take appropriate steps
to transfer this application to the
Sessions Court at Nasik forthwith.
(B.H. Marlapalle,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for leave to appeal under Section 378(1) of Cr.P.C. should be heard by the High Court or the Sessions Court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State
B.H. Marlapalle
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court