This court allowed a criminal application seeking to tag and hear two criminal appeals together as both were directed against the same judgment and order in Sessions Case No. 22 of 2013.
Application allowed in the above terms. Both appealed be tagged and heard together.
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.
6c. cri appa 800-16.doc
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 800 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 469 OF 2016
Lalita Parshuram Vitkar
.. Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
.. Respondent
Appearances
Ms. Sarojini Upadhyay Advocate (appointed) for the Appellant Mrs. U.V. Kejriwal APP for the State
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATE : JULY 7, 2016.
P.C.:
jail. She has stated that she and her husband both have
been convicted in Sessions Case No. 22 of 2013 which was
tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Solapur. The appellant
has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 469 of 2016 (Criminal
Appeal St No. 459 of 2016) and her husband has preferred
Criminal Appeal No. 891 of 2014. The prayer of the
jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 2
6c. cri appa 800-16.doc
applicant in this application is that both the appeals be
heard together.
judgment and order, both the appeals be tagged and heard
together.
[ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether two criminal appeals against the same conviction and sentence should be tagged and heard together.
Lalita Parshuram Vitkar
The State of Maharashtra
V.K. Tahilramani
Mridula BhatakR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
