The petitioner withdrew certain prayers. The State promised to withdraw the impugned order and reconsider the matter.
The impugned order rendered ineffective via withdrawal; petition disposed of.
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.
L
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION No.201/2010
Rajesh Vs. The State.
Office Notes, Office Court�s or Judge�s orders
Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court�s
orders or directions and
Registrar�s orders.
Mr N.N.Gavankar i/b Arfan Sait for the Petitioner.
Mr P.A.Pol, A.P.P.for the State.
CORAM:- D.B. BHOSALE AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE :- 8TH APRIL, 2010.
P.C.:-
Mr Gavankar, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that he has instructions not to
press the prayers (a) & (b) in the petition. His
statement is accepted. Learned incharge P.P.,on
instructions, submits that they will withdraw the order
impugned in the petition and would consider the
petitioner�s case afresh and pass appropriate order
within a period of four weeks from today. His
statement is accepted. In view of the statement made by
the learned P.P., the impugned order renders
ineffective. With these observations the petition is
disposed of.
(A.R.JOSHI,J)
L
Rajesh
The State
D.B. BHOSALE
A.R. JOSHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court