Kanchan Hemraj Nirmal and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
Application for transfer of a criminal case involving 498A and Scheduled Castes offences from Alibaug to Ratnagiri was rejected. The Court directed the Sessions Judge to hear the matter expeditiously using Section 309 CrPC to conclude evidence within two or three days.
What did the court decide?
Application rejected; Sessions Court directed to record evidence of applicants within 2-3 days continuously under Section 309 CrPC.
What the court decided
Sherla V.
appln.60.2014.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.60 OF 2014
Kanchan Hemraj Nirmal & Ors. ... Applicants
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Mr.Y.D. Dalvi for the Applicant Ms.A.A. Mane, APP, for Respondent – State Mr.Prashant Pawar for Resp. Nos.2 to 4
CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.
DATE: JULY 3, 2014
P.C.:
- The application is moved by the applicant, who is the wife and applicant Nos.2 and 3 who are the parents of the applicant No.1 and applicant No.4, who is the sister of applicant No.1. Applicant No.1 has filed a criminal case against the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 i.e., her husband and in-laws. The respondents are prosecuted for the offences punishable under sections 498A and section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The said special case No.7 of 2012 is pending before the Sessions Court at Alibaug.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal case should be transferred from the Sessions Court at Alibaug to the Sessions Court at Ratnagiri.
Whether sufficient ground exists for the transfer of the case to mitigate inconvenience for the applicants.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Kanchan Hemraj Nirmal & Ors.
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra
Coram
Mridul D. Bhatkar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court