Single order where the High Court heard an application, noted prima facie offence, and rejected the application for further investigation without engaging merits.
Nothing granted.
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.
cra1674.16
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1674 OF 2016
Suresh s/o Shravan Tajane
...APPLICANT
VERSUS
1) The State of Maharashtra,
2) Ramchandra s/o Narayan Gaikwad
...RESPONDENTS
...
Mr.B.S. Kudale Advocate for Applicant.
Mr.D.R. Kale, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1.
Mr.S.D. Tawashikar Advocate for Respondent No.2.
...
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 6TH OCTOBER, 2016
ORDER :
1.Heard.
2.Perused the allegations in the F.I.R. and
also the investigation papers. Without making any
cra1674.16
2
comment on merits, at this stage, suffice it to
say that prima facie offence is disclosed, which
needs investigation. Hence the Application stands
rejected.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.]
asb/OCT16
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal application disclosing a prima facie offence stands rejected without merit analysis.
Suresh s/o Shravan Tajane
The State of Maharashtra
Ramchandra s/o Narayan Gaikwad
S.S. Shinde
Sangitrao S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court