Dismissed

Shreedevi Boddu Thimmaiah, Managing Director Sreee Devi Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Maharashtra through the Station House Officer Police Staion Sonegaon and Another

Bombay HC22 Oct 2012APL/572/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal application dismissed unanimously as the applicant failed to file a challenge or new application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The Court held that observations in the rejected order were based on material and not personal, and apprehension of police misuse was misplaced as investigation relies on evidence, not simple court observations.

What did the court decide?

None granted. The application seeking deletion of observations is dismissed.

Shreedevi Boddu Thimmaiah, Managing Director Sreee… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1 apl572.12.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION(APL) NO.572 OF 2012

¶4

(SREEDEVI BODDU THIMMIAH..VS.. STATE OF MAH. THR. PSO PS. SONEGAON & ANR.)

¶5

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

¶8

CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : OCTOBER 22, 2012.

¶9

Heard Mr.Sampat Anand Shetty along with Mr. Girish B. Badiger and Mr. B.N. Jaipurkar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr S.S.Doifode, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1/ State. Respondent No.2 was not directed to be served for the time being.

¶10

The relief sought by the applicant is in respect of certain observations made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur while hearing Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.4110 of 2012 (under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.) filed by the applicants. The said application was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Nagpur by order dated 8^th August, 2012. Certain observations are made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in respect of the transaction between applicant and the complainant. The applicant wants those observations to be deleted from the order.

¶11

At the outset, it may be stated here that the applicant has not filed any application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before this Court after rejection of the application by the Sessions Court. As far as observations made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge are concerned, they are not personal in nature against the applicant. They are

¶12

2 apl572.12.odt

¶13

based on the material placed before the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Therefore, this Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot delete those observations from the order unless the order is challenged. As already stated, there is no challenge to the order nor there is an application before this Court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As far as these observations are concerned, as already stated, they are not personal in nature.

¶14

The learned counsel for the applicant has apprehension that those observations may be used by the police to harass the applicant during the course of investigation and they may be used against the applicant by the police. I think, the apprehension of the learned counsel for the applicant is misplaced, inasmuch as the investigation is always based upon the evidence collected by the police and not on the observations made by the Court in the orders passed under Section 438 or 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or in that matter under Section 439 of the Code.

¶15

In view thereof, I am of the view that no relief can be granted to the applicant. It is reiterated that the apprehension of the applicant is misplaced and does not require any consideration. The application is, therefore, dismissed .

¶16

JUDGE

¶17

RRaut..

Shreedevi Boddu Thimmaiah, Managing Director Sreee Devi Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Maharashtra through the Station House Officer Police Staion Sonegaon and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shreedevi Boddu Thimmaiah, Managing Director Sreee Devi Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Maharashtra through the Station House Officer Police Staion Sonegaon and Another

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

Sanjay Pandharinath Bhavsar Nominee of M/S Anand Mohta Agro Industries and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra at the Instance of Shri Jayant R Wane Food Inspector, Yavatmal

Gowardhan S/O Fagumal Lalwani and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra at the Instance of Shri Jayant Ramdas Wane and Others

Manoj S/O Ramdasji Dhale Vs Satish Balramji Shende

Santosh S/O Rushi Vairagade Vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Virur Distt Chandrapur

Chotu @ Sushil Shalikram Mokalkar and Ors. Vs the State of Mah. Thr. P.S.O.

Vishveshwar S/O Raobaji Nikhare and One Vs Smt. Jankubai Wd/O Raobaji Nikhare and Another