The High Court at Aurangabad rejected a criminal application. The bench held that sufficient material was collected by the prosecution agency to try the case against the applicants and no case was made out to entertain the application.
Application stands rejected.
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.
390.15crapln
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
_____________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders |
______________________________________________________ CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 390 OF 2015
ANAND S/O DHANAJI SHELKE & ORS VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR
Advocate for Applicants : Mr.Gaikwad Bhagwan K. APP for Respondents/State: Mrs.P.J. Bharad.
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & A.M. BADAR, JJ. Dated: FEBRUARY 17, 2015
… Heard. Perused the material placed on record. The prosecution agency has collected enough material so as to try the case against the applicants. No case is made out to entertain this application.
2 Application stands rejected.
(A.M. BADAR, J) (S.S. SHINDE, J)
kadam/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Application deserves to be entertained given the sufficiency of prosecution material.
ANAND S/O DHANAJI SHELKE & ORS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR
S.S. SHINDE
A.M. BADAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
