The criminal writ petition was disposed of as infructuous because the police investigation officer confirmed that a final summary report had been filed, rendering the petition's purpose impossible.
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.
SNS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.578 OF 2011
Pradeep Umakant Chitre & Ors. v/s. The State and Ors.
...Petitioners.
...Respondents.
Mr. S.K.Nyaynirgune ,adv. For the Petitioner.
Mr. V.B.Konde Deshmukh, adv. For the Respondent No.1.
CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : MARCH 11, 2011.
P.C.
is investigating officer and who is present before the Court, makes a
statement that after investigation police have already filed B summary report. In view of this statement the learned counsel for the petitioner
seeks to withdraw the petition as it has become infructuous.
(J.H. BHATIA,J.)
Pradeep Umakant Chitre & Ors.
The State and Ors.
J.H. BHATIA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
