Writ petitions open under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by two petitioners were withdrawn by their counsel. The Court permitted the withdrawal and disposed of the petitions. No substantive legal principle was laid down as the matter was settled by withdrawal.
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.
wp1748-1893.sxw
1/1
Pvr
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1748 OF 2012 Kunal Surendra Rane …Petitioner versus 1.State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1893 OF 2012
Nilesh Vishwanath Patil. …Petitioner versus 1.State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents ---
Mr.Satish Mishra, for Petitioners. Mr.D.R.More, APP for State. P.C. :
--- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : 20th November, 2012 P.C. : Heard. On instructions, the learned Counsel withdraws the writ petitions. Permitted. Disposed of.
(K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.)
Kunal Surendra Rane
Nilesh Vishwanath Patil
State of Maharashtra
K.U.CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
