The high court dismissed a criminal writ petition challenging the issuance of summons. The court held the petition barred by laches, noted the petitioners' acquiescence and prior failed applications for discharge, and found the prosecution meritorious due to unlicensed business operation.
The writ petition was dismissed.
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
abs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1099 OF 1997
Sharifa D. Khatri & Ors. .. Petitioners V/s State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. A.S. Khandeparkar for the petitioners. None for respondent no.1.
Ms. A.T. Jhaveri, A.P.P. For the State.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, JJ.
DATE : 3RD NOVEMBER 2009
P.C. :
2
In fact, they made two applications on 22nd March 1996 and 26th July 1996 for discharge inter alia on the ground that the trial has not proceeded for a considerable period of time and, therefore, that has caused prejudice to the petitioners. Those applications were rejected on 29th August 1997. Though the present petition has been filed after the rejection of the application for discharge, the petitioners have not challenged the order passed by the Magistrate refusing to discharge them. That is an additional ground on which the petition deserves to be dismissed.
3
business without licence. The old licence was not renewed. The petitioners were required to obtain fresh licence for the new business. They carried on the new business without a valid licence and, therefore, there was prima facie material before the Magistrate of commission of the offence under section 390 read with section 471 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. In the circumstances, it cannot be said that the prosecution was vexatious and without any merit. The Magistrate was justified in issuing of the process. Consequently there is no merit in the petition which is hereby dismissed.
(D.G. KARNIK, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the magistrate's order directing issuance of process to the petitioners.
Whether the petition deserves dismissal due to the petitioners' acquiescence and failure to challenge the order refusing discharge.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sharifa D. Khatri & Ors.
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
D.G. Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
