Maskur Alam Siddiqui v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
The applicant sought condonation of a 95-day delay in filing a criminal revision. The Court rejected the request on the grounds that the applicant had filed two earlier writ petitions post-demolition, rendering the stated ground for delay false.
What did the court decide?
Condonation of delay of 95 days in filing the revision application is denied.
What the court decided
-: 1 :-
appr-315
srp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIM. APPLICATION NO. 315 OF 2010
IN
CRIMINAL REVISION APPL.(st.) NO. 479 OF 2010 with
CRIMINAL REVISION APPL.(st.) NO. 479 OF 2010
Maskur Alam Siddique. ..Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents.
..Respondents.
Mr. Moin Khan i/b M/s. Mishra & Co., for the applicant. Mr. S. G. Surana for R-3.
Mr. D. P. Adsule, APP for the State.
Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : November 22, 2011 .
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 95 days in filing the criminal revision application should be condoned given the applicant's claim of displacement?
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Maskur Alam Siddique
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra
Coram
RANJIT MORE
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court