Petitioner sought quashing of F.I.R. and charge-sheet. Court ruled early quashing inappropriate after charge-sheet filing, allowing trial court a chance to proceed or discharge, and disposed of the petition without merits.
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
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 813 OF 2009
Arun Waman Jadhav ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Sameer Singh i/by Mr. Sachin S. Punde for the Petitioner
Mrs. P.H. Kantharia, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State.
CORAM : B ILAL NAZKI and A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 10, 2009
P.C. :-
The petitioner in this petition wants quashing of an F.I.R., No. 172 of 2005. This charge-sheet has now culminated into R.C.C. No. 273 of 2007. Therefore, the petitioner seeks quashing of the charge-sheet also.
2
petitioner will get a clear chance to show the trial Court whether the trial Court should proceed in the matter after framing of the charge or discharge the accused. We do not go to the merits of this case at this sage, lest it may prejudice either of the parties. With this observation, the petition is disposed of.
BILAL NAZKI, J.
A.R. JOSHI, J.
Arun Waman Jadhav
The State of Maharashtra
Bilal Nazki
A.R. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
