This court in a criminal writ petition rejected a prayer to stay further investigation of offences disclosed in both F.I.R.s, holding that counter cases indicate an incident occurred and investigation is necessary, dismissing the petition.
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.
43.15CriWP
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 43 OF 2015 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 124 OF 2015
ASEF KHAN S/O MAHTAB KHAN PATHAN AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Patel Sameer F. APP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.G. Karlekar
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & A.M. BADAR, JJ. Dated: January 16, 2015
PER COURT :-
Heard.
43.15CriWP
2
for the petitioners. We have perused the allegations in both First Information Reports. Offence is disclosed and same needs investigation. The fact that there are counter cases is indication that the incident had taken place.
( A.M. BADAR, J. )
( S.S. SHINDE, J. )
SGA/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether further investigation into the FI R complaints needs to be stayed.
Asef Khan S/o Mahtab Khan Pathan and Others
State of Maharashtra and Others
S.S. Shinde
A.M. Badar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
