In a criminal writ petition, the High Court noted the police affidavit confirming efforts to trace the petitioner's husband and directed disposal of the petition without a hearing, accepting future police action.
No specific relief articulated; petition disposed of without further hearing based on police statement.
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
APPELLATE SIDE
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 156 OF 2007
MRS. T. GEETHA .. PETITIONER
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. RESPONDENTS
Mr. S. P. Davkale h/f V. P. Sawant for
petitioner
Ms. U. V. Kejariwal, APP
CORAM:-SMT. RANJANA DESAI &
D. B. BHOSALE,JJ.
DATED:-21/6/2007
P.C.
. The petitioner’s grievance is that her husband
is not traceable.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned APP.
3. Ms. Kejariwal, learned APP on instructions
from Mr. Jadhav, API from Sahar Police Station,
who is present in the court, states that the police
have made all possible efforts to trace the
petitioner. Having heard the learned APP, we feel
2
that the police have made efforts to trace the
petitioner’s husband. The learned APP states that
the police will continue the efforts. We accept
this statement.
4. In view of this statement, it is not necessary
to keep the petition pending. Petition is disposed
of.
JUDGE.
JUDGE.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal writ petition seeking directions to trace the petitioner's husband requires further hearing given the police affidavit.
Mrs. T. Geetha
The State of Maharashtra
Ranjana Desai
D. B. Bhosale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court