The High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) dismissed the criminal application as it was withdrawn by the applicants on instructions, with liberty to file a revision.
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.
apl-54-13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
rpa
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 54 OF 2013
Pankaj Keshubhai Udhas & Ors. .. Applicants Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
Mr. Mihir Gheewala, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. S. S. Pednekar, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1 – State. Mr. Vijay Pradhan, Senior Counsel a/w. Mr. Faran M. Khan i/b. Mr. R. Satyanarayanan, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
CORAM : K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.
DATED : AUGUST 6, 2013.
P.C. :
Heard.
2 The learned Senior Counsel for respondent no.2, pointed that revision is not preferred. Consequently, on instructions learned counsel for the applicants withdraws the application with liberty to file revision. Permitted. Criminal Application is dismissed as withdrawn.
1/2
apl-54-13
3 Learned Senior Counsel says if such revision application is moved, challenging order dated 28th August, 2012 of the process, the original complainant shall not object on the application for condonation of delay provided the proceedings are initiated within a period of one month from today. By consent for a period of one month exemption applications if moved by the applicants, to be entertained by the learned Judge.
(K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.)
2/2
Pankaj Keshubhai Udhas & Ors.
State of Maharashtra & Anr.
K. U. CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
