The applicant, who filed a criminal application for the transfer of proceedings, was heard by a single judge. The applicant's counsel sought to withdraw the application, citing a relevant Division Bench judgment. The court accepted the prayer and dismissed the application as withdrawn.
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.
G.A.Ghule [P.A.]
1/1
cri.appln. 45.11..sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 45 OF 2011.
RIYA KISHORE PANJWANI. VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
Appearance =>
Mr. Vivek V. Bhavthankar, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mrs. Pratibha Bharad, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Maharashtra.
Mr. S S Bijlani, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 to 6.
Mr. Manish Rai, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 7 & 8.
CORAM : V.M. Deshpande, J. DATE : 23rd June, 2015.
Per Court :-
At the outset, Mr. Vivek Bhavthankar, learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that, he has instructions to withdraw the present Application, which is filed for transfer of proceedings, in view of the Judgment of Division Bench of High Court of Judicature at Bombay, in Criminal Application No.5788 Of 2010 dated 20th April, 2015 (Coram : Ranjit More and Smt. Anuja Prabhudessai, JJ.). Prayer is accepted. Criminal Application is dismissed as withdrawn.
(V.M. DESHPANDE, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal application for transfer of proceedings stands dismissed as voluntarily withdrawn by the appellant with the approval of the court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Criminal Application No.5788 Of 2010 dated 20th April, 2015Referred¶15
RIYA KISHORE PANJWANI
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
V.M. Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
