Dismissed

Ganesh Sonawane and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC10 Jul 2013WP/1642/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed by accused persons challenging an order for issuance of process, the High Court held that while a statutory revision is the efficacious remedy, it granted a liberty to file the revision after providing specific directions to the Sessions court on the computation of limitation periods to account for the time spent in the High Court.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file a revision application before Sessions court within one month; Sessions court directed to consider condonation of delay excluding pendency periods

Ganesh Sonawane and Ors. Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

916-WP-1642-2012

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1642 OF 2012

¶5

GANESH SONAWANE AND ORS. )...PETITIONERS V/s. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. )...RESPONDENTS

¶6

Mr.S.N.Raj Advocate for the Petitioners.

¶7

Mrs.Shilpa Gajare – Dhumal APP for the State.

¶8

CORAM: ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.

¶9

DATE : 10^th JULY, 2013.

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

1 Heard Mr.S.N.Raj, the learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mrs.Shilpa Gajare – Dhumal, the learned APP for the State.

¶12

2 The petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.56/SW/2011, pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court at Andheri. The complaint has been lodged by the respondent no.2 herein. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 9.8.2012 passed by the Magistrate, issuing process against them. They have, therefore, approached this court by invoking its constitutional jurisdiction.

¶13

avk 1/3

¶14

916-WP-1642-2012

¶15

3 The petitioners have a statutory remedy of seeking revision of the said order, which remedy is efficacious. The petitioners have approached this court without availing of the alternative statutory remedy, which, as aforesaid, is effective and efficacious.

¶16

4 When this aspect of the matter was discussed, the learned counsel for the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the petition. He, however, apprehends, that in the event of the petitioners now approaching the court of Sessions by making an application for revision, the Sessions court may not entertain the revision, on the ground that it is barred by limitation.

¶17

5 Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, it would be proper to give appropriate directions to the court of Sessions.

¶18

6 In view of the fact that the following directions are being given to the Sessions court, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the petition.

¶19

7 The petition is allowed to be withdrawn and stands dismissed as such, with liberty to the petitioners to approach the court of Sessions by filing an application for revision.

¶20

8 In the event of such an application being filed within a period of one month from today, with a prayer for condonation of the delay, the court of Sessions shall take into consideration the period for which the present petition has been pending before this court and exclude the same in computing the period of limitation.

¶21

avk 2/3

¶22

916-WP-1642-2012

¶23

9 The court of Sessions shall also exclude the period before the service of process on the petitioners, and a further period, from today till the filing of the revision application, from consideration, while computing the period of limitation for filing the revision application.

¶24

10 If the revision application would still be not within the period of limitation, it would be for the Sessions court to consider the question of condonation of delay in the light of the cause, as may be shown by the petitioners.

¶25

11 The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶26

(ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.)

¶27

avk 3/3

Ganesh Sonawane and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Sonawane and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mangesh Tukaram Sawant and Ors. Vs Veluswamy Trikau and Anr.

Narayan Dattatray Thopate and Anr. Vs Vice Chancellor Dr Raghunath Shevgaonkar and Ors.

Vijay @ Sohan Raghunandan Prajapati Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Anant Dhole Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Balkrishan Rajendraprasad Chaubey Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.

Irfan Chand Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra