Disposed

Kalim Papamiya Shaikh v. the State of Mah

Bombay HC5 Nov 2012APPLN/4421/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal application, the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad directed the Superintendent of Police, Latur, to provide an escort for the undertrial prisoner to appear regularly in court. The court directed the Sessions Judge to expedite the hearing.

What did the court decide?

Directed Superintendent of Police, Latur to provide escort and file a report; Sessions Judge directed to expedite trial; liberty granted to file similar application if trial not concluded within 6 mon

Kalim Papamiya Shaikh Vs the State of Mah — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4421 OF 2012

¶4

Kalim Papamiya Shaikh, Age-28 years, Occu-Labour, R/o.Bilal Nagar, Ausa, Tal.Ausa, Dist.Latur

APPLICANT

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra

RESPONDENT

Mr.S.C.Swami, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.P.P.More, learned A.P.P. for respondent/State.

¶10

( CORAM : M.T.JOSHI, J.)

¶11

DATE : 05/11/2012

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Heard both sides.

¶14

The present application is again depicts a sorry state of affairs regarding the co-operation, the Trial Court receives, in early conclusion of the cases of under trial prisoners from the State machinery.

¶15

The present applicant is arrested in the month of October 2011 in Crime No.105/2011 by Ausa Police Station for the offences u/s. 302, 498-A, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC. He is the husband of the deceased.

¶16

¶17

She appears to have made a dying declaration that the applicant set her on fire.

¶18

In the circumstances, the learned APP was directed to take instructions from the Registrar of the concerned Sessions Court to find out as to within how much period, the trial would be concluded. The report of the learned Sessions Judge shows that no escort is being provided by the Supdt. of Police at Latur to present the accused in the Court for the purposes of framing of charge. This report is dated 02/11/2012.

¶19

In the circumstances, the present application is disposed of, with liberty to the present applicant to file similar application, on set of facts, in case the trial is not concluded within 6 months.

¶20

The Supdt. of Police, Latur is directed to look into the matter and provide necessary escort for production of the Under Trial Prisoners in the Court regularly. The Supdt. Of Police, Latur to file the report in this regard on or before 20/11/2012. The Learned Sessions Judge is also directed to expedite the hearing of Sessions Case No.46/2012. Communicate the concerned Sessions Judge accordingly.

¶21

( M.T.JOSHI, J.)

¶22

khs/NOV. 2012/cri.appl.4421-12

Kalim Papamiya Shaikh v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalim Papamiya Shaikh v. the State of Mah

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

Mahesh Gajendra Shewale Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Mahesh Gajendra Shewale Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Rohidas@Haridas Suryakant Gunjal Vs the State of Mah

Shivkumar Bhagwan Manurkar Vs Anantrao Shivajirao Wagh

Sanjay Munjijirao Ghodajkar Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Rameshwar Madhukar Sarpe Vs the State of Mah