The Court held that the only surviving relief in the writ petition was the prayer for compensation. It clarified that compensation depends on findings of the criminal court and remains consequential. The petitioners have option to file substantive petition regarding investigation grievances.
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 123609
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
vgm
CRIMINAL APELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1236 OF 2009
Rajeev Atmaram Prabhu & Ors. ...Petitioners
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Madhav Jamdar for the Petitioners
Mr. P.A. Pol, P.P., for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and 8
Mr. Sanjeev Kadam with Mr. Vivek Salunke for Respondent No. 4
Mr. Vilas Tapkir for Respondent No. 5
Mr. Chandrakant Yadav for Respondent No. 6
CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND R.G. KETKAR, JJ. DATE: DECEMBER 21, 2011
P.C.:-
Considering the order dated 7th July, 2011, it is obvious that
what survives for consideration is only prayer clause (E) of the petition.
Prayer clause (E) reads thus:-
“(E) By an appropriate writ, order or direction of this Hon’ble Court, the Respondent No.1 – State of Maharashtra be directed to pay compensation as deemed fit and proper by
2 123609
this Hon’ble Court to the Petitioners and the same be recovered from Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and other concerned Police officials.”
As a result, the issue relating to compensation alone can be considered in this pending petition.
3 123609
considered in the pending criminal case registered on the basis of complaint made on 29th December, 2008. All questions in that behalf are left open.
R.G. KETKAR, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether compensation claim under prayer clause (E) can be considered independently of the pending criminal case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajeev Atmaram Prabhu & Ors.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
A.M. Khanwilkar
R.G. Ketkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
