Sameer Nizam Sayyad v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner withdrew bail proceeding seeking to show MCoca inapplicability. Court disposed petition as withdrawn fixed fees.
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.
-:(1):-
26
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION
Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders. Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 26 OF 2015
SAMEER NIZAM SAYYAD VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Basarkar A. P. (appointed) APP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2: Mr. K. M. Suryawanshi.
CORAM: T. V. NALAWADE & SMT. I. K. JAIN, JJ. DATED: 30th MARCH, 2015.
PER COURT:
1 Of 2
-:(2):-
26
provisions of M.C.O.C.A. In view of the circumstance, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he wants to withdraw the present proceeding with liberty to file appropriate proceeding. So, petition is disposed as withdrawn.
[SMT. I. K. JAIN, J.] [T. V. NALAWADE, J.] Dt.30/03/2015 ans/26
2 Of 2
SAMEER NIZAM SAYYAD
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
T. V. NALAWADE
I. K. JAIN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court