The High Court granted leave to appeal in a sessions case against specific accused persons and directed the lower court to take action under Section 390 of the CrPC.
Leave to appeal granted against accused No. 1 and 2; Sessions Court directed to take action under Section 390 CrPC.
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 SIDE
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2737 OF 2008
The State of Maharashtra Vs.
Chandrakant Tukaram Khurange & Ors. ... Respondents
Mrs.M.M.Deshmukh, APP for State.
Mr.Rahul S. Kate, Advocate for Respondents No. 1 to 4.
CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, JJ.
August 07, 2009.
P.C.
1 Heard Mrs. Deshmukh learned APP for Applicant. We have perused the reasoning set out in the impugned order passed in Sessions Case No. 105 of 2007. We have also gone through the depositions of PW8 Medical Officer.
2 Leave to appeal is hereby granted under Section 378 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code only against accused No. 1 and 2 and the appeal is admitted accordingly.
3 Action under Section 390 of the Criminal Procedure Code to be taken by the Sessions Court.
Sd/sd/(SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether leave to appeal should be granted against accused No. 1 and 2 in Sessions Case No. 105 of 2007.
What action the Sessions Court must take under Section 390 of CrPC.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
The State of Maharashtra
Chandrakant Tukaram Khurange
B.H. Marlapalle
Roshan Dalvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
