Single Judge clarified that a prior observation requiring a Division Benches examination was based on the Registry note, not the Court opinion, and dismissed the matter for proper placement before the appropriate Bench per Appellate Side Rules.
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)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.
Criminal Writ Petition No. 240 of 2013 With Criminal Writ Petition No. 241 of 2013
Dattu Jagannath Bhondwe. .. Petitioner.
versus
The State of Maharashtra & others.
.. Respondents.
Mr. V.D. Hon, Advocate, holding for Mr. A.V. Hon, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. S.R. Palnitkar, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent nos.1 and 2.
Mr. P.V. Mandlik, Senior Advocate, with Mr. A.S. Gandhi, Advocate, for the respondent no.3.
CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.
DATE : 22ND NOVEMBER 2013
P. C. :
(2)
( ABHAY M. THIPSAY )
JUDGE
bgp/criwp240etc
Dattu Jagannath Bhondwe
The State of Maharashtra
Abhay M. Thipsay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
