Allowed

Renuka M. Kalro v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC23 Apr 2009APPP/103/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed the applicant's application for restoration of a previously dismissed leave application subject to depositing Rs. 1,000 as costs and dismissal if unpaid within one week, fixing the matter for hearing of the leave application after eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Allowed the restoration application conditionally upon depositing Rs. 1,000 costs; matter fixed for hearing the leave application after eight weeks.

Renuka M. Kalro Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶2

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.103 OF 2009 IN' CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3974 OF 2006

Renuka M.Kalre

.. Applicant

V/s.

State of Maharashtra & Anr.

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

Mr.N.L.Makhijani, Senior i/b. Mr.M.J.Kalro counsel for the Applicant. Mr.Amarchandra Mishra for Respondent No.2. S.R.Shinde, A.P.P.for the State.

¶9

CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J.

¶10

DATED : APRIL 23^rd , 2009.

¶11

P.C.

¶12

Heard rival submissions for some time.

¶13

It is the application for restoration of earlier dismissed leave application and earlier application for restoration. Lastly, the said restoration application was dismissed on 16^th March, 2009 and said order was recalled by this Court by order dated 20^th March, 2009

¶14

¶15

and it was directed to give fresh notice of the fixed date to the concerned Respondents today. Respondent No.2 is represented by lawyer and objected for restoration of earlier dismissed application on the ground that in the present application it is not mentioned that earlier restoration application was dismissed by this Court.

¶16

After going through the record and earlier order and after hearing rival submission and considering that the applicant original complainant wants to challenge the acquittal of Respondent No.2 i.e. the original accused which was for the offence punishable under section 420 of Indian Penal Code, in the opinion of this Court, present restoration application can be allowed on imposing certain costs on the applicant and that the matter can be placed on board for hearing the leave application and also whether to admit the appeal or not.

¶17

Today, in view of the above, the present application under consideration is, allowed and the original application for leave to file is restored on the conditions that applicant shall deposit the costs of Rs.1,000/- with Maharashtra Legal Services Authority. If such costs are not paid within one week from today, then, the present application shall stands dismissed. If the costs are paid, then, the matter be fixed for hearing the leave application.

¶18

With these directions criminal application is, disposed of.

¶19

¶20

The leave application shall be taken after eight weeks.

¶21

(A.R. JOSHI, J.)

¶22

Renuka M. Kalro v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renuka M. Kalro v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Vishnupant Dhondugade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Alexander Peter Anthony and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra

Shakil Rahimuddin Sayyed @ Yahya Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ismt Ltd, Vs M/S. Bharatia Mini Spring and Engg. Co. (P) Ltd, and Ors.

Ismt Ltd, Vs M/S. Bharatia Mini Spring and Engg. Co. (P) Ltd, and Ors.

Vijay Shankar Shendkar Vs Suryakant Sakharam More and Anr.