In a criminal writ petition, the petitioner sought registration of a separate First Information Report for an incident already recorded in Crime No. 191/2014. The court rejected the prayer, observing that an FIR was already registered and the petitioner was cited as a witness.
Petition rejected; prayer for separate FIR 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGBAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 102 OF 2015
MANOHAR S/O NARAYAN BANSWAL VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Solunke Narayan R. APP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.D. Kaldate
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & A. I. S. CHEEMA, JJ. Dated: August 04, 2015
PER COURT :-
Heard.
( A. I. S. CHEEMA, J. )
sga/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a separate First Information Report for the same incident already recorded in Crime No. 191/2014.
Manohar Banswal
State of Maharashtra
S. S. Shinde
A. I. S. Cheema
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
