The High Court declined to intervene directly in a criminal revision application challenging a summary case report, directing the applicant to approach the Sessions Court. Application disposed as withdrawn.
Leave granted to withdraw the revision application.
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 JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 355 OF 2007
Sudhakar Bhojaya Shetty ..Applicant
Vs.
Sudamarao Chandrakant Gaikwad
and ors. ..Respondents
Mr. S.A. Tawale for applicant.
Mr. M.S. Mohite for respondent nos.1 and 2.
Mrs.P.P. Shinde, APP for State.
CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE,J.
Dated: July 30, 2008.
P.C.:
. Heard. The applicant is aggrieved by the
order passed by the learned JMFC at Vasai on 22/5/2007
thereby accepting "B" Summary Report submitted by the
Investigating Officer of Nalasopara Police Station in
Crime No. I-53 of 2003. The said order can be
challenged by filing Criminal Revision Application
before the Sessions Court and there is no reason to
entertain this revision application directly by this
court.
. The learned counsel for the applicant,
:2:
therefore, seeks leave to withdraw the revision
application with liberty to approach the Sessions
Court at Thane/Vasai.
. Leave granted and the revision application is
disposed as withdrawn with liberty as is available in
law.
(B.H. Marlapalle,J.)
Sudhakar Bhojaya Shetty
Sudamarao Chandrakant Gaikwad
B.H. Marlapalle
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court