Single judge dismissed a criminal writ petition seeking to quash proceedings. The court held that the contentions involved factual disputes unfit for a writ petition and that the petitioners had adequate alternative statutory remedies.
The petition was dismissed.
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
CWP-1757.12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1757 OF 2012
DILIP DAMODAR SALVI & ANR. .. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR... RESPONDENTS
None for the petitioners Mrs. R. V. Newton, APP for the State Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w Ms. Priya Jadhav i/b M/s. Vidhi Partners, Advocate for R. No. 2.
CORAM:-ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : 26/06/2013
P.C.
None appears for the petitioners, when called out.
1/2
2
CWP-1757.12
learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has already filed the affidavit-in-reply, and it does not appear that the respondent No. 2 is consenting for quashing of the proceedings.
(ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.)
md.saleem
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a criminal writ petition for quashing proceedings should be allowed given factual disputes and availability of alternative statutory remedies.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dilip Damodar Salvi & Anr.
State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Abhay M. Thipsay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
