Disposed

Devan Govind Bhambal v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Apr 2010WP/336/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Bombay Criminal Appellate Bench disposed of a writ petition by relying on the petitioner's readiness to cooperate with investigation for potential arrest. The petition was withdrawn upon the issuance of a 72-hour notice for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to make himself available for interrogation; 72 hours notice to be issued before arrest; liberty to move for discharge on charge-sheet; petition disposed of as withdrawn.

Devan Govind Bhambal Vs the State of Maharashtra — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.336 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. OF 2010

¶5

Devdan Govind Bhambal .. Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondents.

¶6

Mr.Rajeev Patil with Ramesh Dube i/b M/s.Jay & Co. for the petitioner.

¶7

Mr.Y.M.Nakhawa A.P.P. for the State. Ms.P.U.Badadare for the intervenor.

¶8

Mr.Habib Abdul Kadam Shakri Habib for the original complainant. Mr.P.R.Pimple, P.I. Tardeo police station present.

¶9

CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 9TH APRIL, 2010.

¶10

P.C.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

Learned A.P.P. on instructions from the investigating officer – P.R.Pimple submits that if the petitioner co-operates with the investigation and makes himself available for interrogation they would issue 72 hours notice to him, if, after interrogation, they decide to arrest him. Mr.Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is ready to make himself available for interrogation as and when called by the officer. He further submits that in view of the statement made by learned A.P.P. that they would issue 72 hours notice to the petitioner, in the event they decide to arrest him, he has instructions to withdraw the petition. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the

¶13

¶14

parties we are satisfied that this writ petition can be disposed of by the following order:

¶15

(a) The petitioner is directed to make himself available for interrogation as and when called by the investigating officer. The investigating officer shall issue 72 hours notice to the petitioner, in the event, he decides to arrest the petitioner in connection with C.R.No.85 of 2009.

¶16

(b) Liberty to the petitioner to approach an appropriate court, seeking discharge in the event the police file charge-sheet against him. If any such application is made by the petitioner, same may be considered and decided on merits in accordance with law.

¶17

¶18

Consequently, intervention application is also disposed of.

¶19

(A.R.JOSHI,J.)

¶20

(D.B.BHOSALE,J.)

Devan Govind Bhambal v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devan Govind Bhambal v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Phoolbanoo Bakhshi Ilahi Vs Sr. Inspector of Police and Ors.

Ratnakar Rekarnath Behera Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

M/S. Maruti Metal Industries Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Alka Ananda Jadhav Vs Principal Secretary Home Department and Ors.

Ashok Yeshwant Bhoite Vs the State of Maharashtra

Raghunath K. Kottary Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.