Disposed

Kkrishna M.A. Raihany v. Union of India and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Sept 2007WP/1587/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, Criminal Writ Petition No. 1587 of 2007 was disposed of while accepting a statement from the Assistant Public Prosecutor allowing the petitioner to remain in India until September 11, 2007, based on instructions from the Police Inspector.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of; the petitioner allowed to remain in India till 11-9-2007 in State custody.

Kkrishna M.A. Raihany Vs Union of India and Ors. — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

[1]

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 APPELLATE SIDE
 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1587 OF 2007

¶3

 Kkrishna M.A. Raihany .... Petitioner
 Vs.

¶4

 Union of India & Ors. .... Respondents

¶5

 Ms Maharukh P. Adenwalla for the Petitioner.

¶6

 Shri R.B. Raghuwanshi, Addl. Solicitor General,
 for the Respondent No.1.

¶7

 Ms A.S. Pai, APP, for the Respondent Nos.2
 and 3.

¶8

CORAM: R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR &
 Smt. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ.

¶9

DATED: SEPTEMBER 06, 2007

¶10

P.C:

¶11

 The copy of the letter dated 5-9-2007 by the
 Protection Officer of the United Nations High
 Commissioner for Refugees, addressed to Mr. Rajvardhan,
 produced by the learned Advocate for the petitioner is
 placed on record. After hearing the matter, the learned
 APP, on instructions from Shri Namdeo Mahadeo More,
 Police Inspector, Special Branch-II, Mumbai states that
 the petitioner will be allowed to remain in India (in
 Mumbai) till 11-9-2007 in the State’s custody. We
 accept the said statement and in the facts and
 circumstances of the case, nothing further is required
 to be done in the matter. The petition accordingly is
 disposed of while accepting the said statement.

¶12

[2]

¶13

 Needless to say that in case the Advocate for the
 petitioner and the representative of the United Nations
 High Commissioner for Refugees want to meet the
 petitioner, he/she will be allowed to meet the
 petitioner in the presence of the police officer to be
 deputed by the respondents.

¶14

 (Smt.V.K.Tahilramani, J.) (R.M.S.Khandeparkar, J.)

¶15

 sjs/S7cwp1587.7

Kkrishna M.A. Raihany v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kkrishna M.A. Raihany v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Iyer Vs the Station House Office, Rohtak Civil Lines Police Station and Ors.

Naresh Chandak Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Khangaram Mangaram Choudhary and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ramija Ayyub Bagwan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sheikh Tamiz Sheikh Peru Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shyamsunder Narsinh Dube and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.