In a criminal writ petition challenging an order of the Additional Sessions Judge directing the petitioner to conduct business lawfully, the High Court found no unbridled license in favor of the petitioner and dismissed the writ petition.
The writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed with no interference in the impugned order.
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.
wp-854-13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
rpa
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2013
Sanjay Shankar Sanale .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
Mr. K. K. Pandey, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. S. Pednekar, A.P.P. for Respondent No. 1 – State. Mr. Vishal Tambat, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
CORAM : K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.
DATED : AUGUST 13, 2013.
P.C. :
Counsel for respondent no.2 has filed documents
which were placed before the first Appellate Court.
3 The order in criminal Revision Application No.123
of 2011 recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik dated 20th November, 2012 are questioned. On reading the orders, and hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, it is explicit, learned Judge has directed respondents herein
1/2
wp-854-13
(petitioner in revision) to run the business of suit premises by whatever nature by following process establish by law. Thus, there was no unbridled licence in favour of the said revision applicant to conduct the business. If any objection persist, the writ petitioner can address the same before the authority dealing with sanctioning of licence for lawful activities. No interference warranted in the order. Writ petition is dismissed.
(K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.)
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the order of the Additional Sessions Judge directing the petitioner to run the business according to the established legal process.
Sanjay Shankar Sanale
The State of Maharashtra
Anr.
K. U. CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
