The High Court dismissed the application seeking early hearing of a criminal appeal, noting it would proceed under the expedited "Convicts in Jail" category based on its filing year.
Application disposed of; appeal to proceed under category "Convicts in Jail" according to its turn.
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 appa2811
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 28 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 397 OF 2009
Santosh Bansilal Varma ...Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr. Niteen V. Pradhan i/by Mr. S.D. Khot for the Applicant
Ms. M.H. Mhatre, A.P.P., for the State.
CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATE: 21ST JANUARY, 2011
P.C.:-
This application is filed for early hearing of the appeal, in view of the liberty given to the applicant to take out such application in terms of order dated 11th December, 2009. Even so, going by the present assignment, it is not possible to give precedence to this matter, inasmuch as cases falling under category “Convicts in Jail” have been given precedence and treated as expedited cases. The oldest appeal falling under that category, which is already on Board, pertains to year 2004. The present appeal pertains to year 2009, for which reason, it may not be
2 appa2811
given precedence over those cases. We make it clear that the appeal shall proceed under category "Convicts in Jail" as per its turn.
Application disposed of accordingly.
A.R. JOSHI, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.
Santosh Bansilal Varma
The State of Maharashtra
A.M. KHANWILKAR
A.R. JOSHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
