This brief order dismissed an application alleging misrepresentation in a previous OTP order. The sankya found no substance in the grievance and disposed of the matter accordingly.
Application 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.
28_apl_140_2015.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.140 OF 2015
Sandeep Bushan Jain ...Applicant
Versus
Ajit Jamnadas Mehta & Anr. …. Respondents
Mr. Bushan C. Jain, power of attorney of the Applicant, present. Mr. Kishor N. Bhatia for Respondent No.1 Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for Respondent No.2-State.
CORAM:-M.L. TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : 20th MARCH, 2015.
P.C.
Heard the power of attorney holder of the Applicant, learned Advocate for Respondent No.1 and learned APP for Respondent No.2-State. Admit. By consent taken up forthwith for final hearing.
megha Page No.1 of 2
28_apl_140_2015.doc
not said anything more than this and the case was remanded back to the trial Magistrate for deciding the case in accordance with law. Court has also made it clear that if the parties are ready and willing to compound the offence, same could be done and appropriate order can be passed by the Magistrate. This Applicant alleges that said order was obtained by Respondent No.1 by making misrepresentation.
(JUDGE)
megha Page No.2 of 2
Sandeep Bushan Jain
Ajit Jamnadas Mehta & Anr.
M.L. Tahaliyani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
