Dismissed

Ajay Ganesh Ubale v. Shobhana Bhartia and Ors.

Bombay HC28 Nov 2011APL/956/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application challenging the Metropolitan Magistrate's refusal to cancel an exemption granted to respondents for non-appearance. The Court held that the Magistrate correctly refused the prayer and found no ground for interference under Section 482 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision application seeking cancellation of exemption was dismissed.

Ajay Ganesh Ubale Vs Shobhana Bhartia and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2011)

apl 956.11

SSK/917

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 956 OF 2011

¶5

Ajay Ganesh Ubale ....Applicant Versus Ms. Shobhana Bhartia & Ors. ...Respondents

¶6

Mr. Vijay Hiremath, advocate for the applicant.

¶7

Mr. Shirish Gupte, Sr. Advcoate with Mr. Amey Nabar and Mr. Ameya Deosthale, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr. S. V. Gajare, APP for the State.

¶8

CORAM : RANJIT MORE, J.

¶9

DATED : 28^th NOVEMBER, 2011.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶12

The petitioner by this application challenges Order dated 1^st August, 2011 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate whereby his application at Exhibit “P-13” came to be rejected. By the said application, the applicant’s prayed for cancellation of exemption granted to all the respondents. According to the applicant, the exemption should be cancelled as the respondents-accused did not comply with Order dated 21^st February, 2011 passed by this High Court in Criminal Application no.3520 of 2010, inasmuch as, neither the respondents nor their advocate remained present on 5^th May, 2011. According to the respondents, on 30^th March,

¶13

SSK/917 2 apl 956.11

¶14

2011, the complaint was adjourned to 5^th May, 2011 at 2.45 p.m. for recording further evidence, however, the matter was called out in the morning session, and therefore, nobody was present. Record shows that the respondents’ advocate was present on 5^th May, 2011, though not at 11.00 a.m.. The applicant filed the application for cancellation of exemption after one and half month from 5^th May, 2011. The Magistrate rightly refused to grant the prayer of the complainant. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to interfere in the aforesaid revision in the jurisdiction of this Court conferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The criminal revision application is, accordingly,

¶15

dismissed.

¶16

(RANJIT MORE, J.)

Ajay Ganesh Ubale v. Shobhana Bhartia and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Ganesh Ubale v. Shobhana Bhartia and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yellappa Vishnu Sonkamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Yellappa Vishnu Sonkamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Yellappa Vishny Sonkamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ashwinee Avinash Baokar Vs Laxman Iyer and Ors.

Sukhdev Shankar MANE0 Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manjula S. Agerwala and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.