Petitioner-wife of accused sought transfer of investigation in a criminal case to another station. Court held she lacked locus standi and transfer was irrelevant post-charge-sheet, dismissing petitions praying for investigation transfer under writ jurisdiction.
Petition dismissed; prayers for transfer of investigation refused.
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.
1/2
WP/1811/2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1811 OF 2014
Mrs. Romi Mahendra Chaurasiya ….. Petitioner.
V/s
The State of Maharashtra & Others ….... Respondents.
Ms. Dipika Batheja i/b Pravin Gaikwad for the Petitioner. Mrs. P.H. Kantharia, APP for the State. Mr. Vinay Bhate for Respondent No.3.
CORAM: V. M. KANADE & P.D. KODE, JJ.
DATE: 1st October, 2014.
P.C.:-
2/2
WP/1811/2014
(P.D. KODE, J. ) (V.M. KANADE, J.)
BDPPS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has locus standi to seek transfer of investigation.
Whether the Court can grant transfer of investigation relief after chargesheet has been filed.
Whether writ jurisdiction under Article 226 can be used to grant relief for transfer of investigation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Romi Mahendra Chaurasiya
The State of Maharashtra
V. M. Kanade
P.D. Kode
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
