Allowed
Moinuddin Papamiya Peerzade and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra
Bombay HCABA/956/2013
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
sbw
aba956.13
1/1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.956 OF 2013
Moinuddin Papamiya Peerzade & Ors.
...Applicants
vs.
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondents
Mr. Ejaz N. Shaikh for the Applicants. Ms. A. A. Mane, APP, for the Respondent – State.
CORAM : A. H. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 17th October, 2013
1] Learned APP has informed the Court that on what has
transpired so far, the complainant appears to be an impersonator and the complainant has failed to bring any evidence to prove her genuineness.
2] Therefore without going into any further discussion, this application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) of paragraph No.24 on applicants furnishing bail and surety bond in a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees Five Thousand) each.
wadhwa
Moinuddin Papamiya Peerzade & Ors.
The State of Maharashtra
A. H. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court