In continuation of WRIT PETITION 2084 OF 2006, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay rejected Criminal Application No.119 of 2008 without adjudication on merits, holding the Applicant lacked locus to participate in the writ proceedings.
Rejection of Criminal Application on account of lack of locus standi to intervene.
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 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.119 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION 2084 OF 2006.
..............................................................
Office Notes, Office
memorandum of Coram,
appearances, Court’sCourt’s or
orders or directionsJudge’s orders.
& Registrar’s orders.
Mr.A.P. Mundargi, with Ashish S.Gaikwad,
for the Applicant.
Mr.N.V. Pradhan, with R.K. Mendadkar, for
the Respondent No.1.
Ms. P.P. Shinde, APP, for the
Respondent -State.
CORAM: A.S.OKA,J.
DATE : 8TH AUGUST, 2008.
P.C.:
1.Heard the learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the Applicant. Considering
the challenge in the Writ Petition, it is
obvious that the Applicant has no locus
for permitting his intervention in the
Criminal Writ Petition. The Application
is rejected only on the ground that the
Applicant has no locus.
-2-
2.It is madeclear that no
adjudication is made on the merits of
contentions raised in the Application.
[A.S.OKA, J.]
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Applicant has loc tenent permit intervention in the underlying Writ Petition.
Applicant
Respondent No.1
State
A.S.OKA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court