The High Court at Bombay held that it cannot issue a direction to deploy police personnel to prevent trespass. As an FIR was registered during the petition's pendency, the substantive prayer was not pursued, leading to the disposal of the petition.
null
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
crwp1876
ssp
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1876 OF 2012
Office Notes, Office
memorandum of Coram,
appearances, Court’s Court’s or
orders or directions & Judge’s orders.
Registrar’s orders.
Mr.Sagar Joshi for the petitioners
Mr.K.V.Saste, A.P.P for the respondent-State
CORAM : A.S. OKA &
S.S.SHINDE,JJ.
DATE :NOVEMBER 30, 2012
P.C.:
1The learned counsel for the
petitioners on instructions states
that during the pendency of the
petition, F.I.R on the basis of the
complaint of the petitioners has been
registered. Therefore, substantive
prayer in this petition is worked out.
In the fact of the case, a direction
to deploy the Police Personnel for
preventing trespass cannot be issued
in writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, we
dispose of the petition.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a direction to deploy Police Personnel for preventing trespass could be issued in writ jurisdiction.
Petitioners
State
A.S. OKA
S.S. SHINDE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court