Dismissed
Yusuf Khan Ghouse Khan v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Bombay HCPIL/89/2007
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
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 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 89 OF 2007
.......................................................... Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearance, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders
Court’s or Judge’s orders
Mr. S.S. Dube for the Petitioner. Mr. R.M. Kadam, A.G. with S.R. Nargolkar, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. Mr. T.D. Deshmukh for Respondent No.3. Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni, A.A.G. for Respondent No.2.
CORAM : J.N. PATEL AND A.A. SAYED, JJ.
DATE : 17TH OCTOBER,2007.
P.C. :
This petition was partly
heard in the morning session.
| Thereafter, | the l |
earned | Counsel | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| for | the petitioner |
su | bmitted | that |
| the | matter be |
kept | in | the |
| afternoon | session so |
that | he | can |
| seek | further instructio |
ns | from | the |
| petitioner | whether | to | prosecute | |
| the petition | or withdraw the same. |
:2:
states that he may be permitted to
withdraw the petition.
| 3. As prim |
arily, the petiti | on is | |
|---|---|---|---|
| based on |
newspaper | report and |
he |
| has no |
other | record | to |
| substantiate | his | contention, | we |
| may permit |
the | petitioner | to |
| withdraw the |
petition. | The sum |
of |
| Rs.1,00,000/- | deposited | in | this |
| Court can be with | drawn by the | ||
| petitioner. |
| 4. | Before parti | ng with | the | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| order, | we | may | caution | the |
| petitioner | that | in | future, | the |
| petitioner | should | be | careful | while |
| invoking | the | extr | a-ordinary | |
| jurisdiction | of | this | Court, | |
| particularly, | in |
the | nature |
of |
| public | interest | litigation | ||
| challenging | the | appointments | of | |
| high official | s / dignitaries | and | ||
| costitutional | authorities. |
:3:
be withdrawn with liberty to
withdraw the amount.
withdrawn.
J.N. PATEL, J.
A.A. SAYED, J.
Mr. S.S. Dube for the Petitioner
Mr. R.M. Kadam, A.G.
Mr. T.D. Deshmukh
Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni, A.A.G.
J.N. PATEL
A.A. SAYED
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court