Allowed
Bipin Ratilal Mehta v. Baliram Bapu Patil and Anr.
Bombay HCAPPP/88/2007
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYIN 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 88 OF 2007
IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6918 OF 2005
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 89 OF 2007
IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6920 OF 2005
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 90 OF 2007
IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6919 OF 2005
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 92 OF 2007
IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4107 OF 2005
Bipin R. Mehta.... Applicant
versus
Baliram Bapu Patil & anr....... Respondent.
Mr,. Sachin Dhakephalkar for the applicant.
Mr. P.P.Shinde APP for State.
CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED; 25TH JANUARY, 2008
P.C.;
1. Despite service, none appears for the respondent
no.1. These are the applications for restoration of
applications, which came to be dismissed for non
prosecution, on account of absence of counsel on
29-11-2006. The reason set out for justifying the
absence of the counsel is stated in para 11 of the
appalication. It is stated that the advocate for the
applicant did not appear in the court as he had met
with an accident on 15-11-2006 and the doctor had
advised him to take bed rest for a period of three
months. Having regard to the reason set out for the
absence of the counsel, the present applications are
allowed. The order dated 29-11-2006 is set aside.
Criminal Applications arestored to file.
Bipin R. Mehta
Baliram Bapu Patil
A.P. Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court