High Court rejected criminal writ petition raising disputed factual questions unsuitable for adjudication under writ jurisdiction, leaving statutory remedies open.
Writ petition rejected; statutory remedies left open.
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 AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.398 OF 2015
Saliquddin Zaiuddin Chisti
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra
and others.
...RESPONDENTS
...
Mr.R.M. Deshmukh Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr.V.D. Godbharle, A.P.P. for Resp. Nos.1 to 4.
...
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND
A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.
DATE : 5TH AUGUST, 2015
ORDER :
. The Petition raises disputed questions of
facts. It is not possible for this Court to
adjudicate the disputed questions of facts while
exercising the writ jurisdiction. Leaving open the
remedy as provided under the relevant provisions,
the Writ Petition stands rejected.
[A.I.S.CHEEMA,J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.]
asb/AUG15
Saliquddin Zaiuddin Chisti
The 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