This criminal application filed under Section 482 CrPC was dismissed as the High Court found the FIR indicated a cognizable offence, leaving no scope for quashing the summoning process.
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.
Sr.No. 11
apl 947.15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 947 OF 2015
Mrs. Sariat Biraju Yadav and ors. ..Applicants Versus Mrs. Indu Ganesh Yadav and anr. ..Respondents
Mr. B. G. Tangsali, advocate for the applicants. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for the State.
CORAM : RANJIT MORE &
V. L. ACHLIYA, JJ.
DATE : 3rd DECEMBER, 2015.
P. C. :
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned APP
for the State.
[V. L. ACHLIYA, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]
1/1
Shubhada S Kadam
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner application seeking quashing summoning process can be entertained given the cognizable nature of the offence disclosed in the annexed FIR.
Mrs. Sariat Biraju Yadav and ors.
Mrs. Indu Ganesh Yadav and anr.
Ranjit More
V. L. Achliya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
