The High Court allowed the withdrawal of two criminal writ petitions and disposed of them accordingly. No substantive legal issues were addressed in this order.
Petitions allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of as such.
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
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3013 OF 2005
Sachin Hindurao Waze. ..Petitioner.
Versus
State of Maharashtra
and Anr. ..Respondents.
..
Mr.Narendra Dhanawade, Adv. for the Petitioner.
Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr.P.Janardhan, Adv. for Respondent No.2.
ALONG WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.488 OF 2006
Sachin Hindurao Waze. ..Petitioner.
Versus
State of Maharashtra
and 10 Ors. ..Respondents.
Mr.Narendra Dhanawade, Adv. for the Petitioner.
Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr.P.Janardhan, Adv. for Respondent No.3 to 8.
CORAM : R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR AND
SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ.
DATED : AUGUST 07, 2007.
P.C.:-
1. On oral motion made by the learned
Advocate for the Petitioner, the Petitions are
allowed to be withdrawn and stand disposed of as
such.
[R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR,J.]
-(2)-
[SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]
Sachin Hindurao Waze
State of Maharashtra
R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR
SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court