The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench rejected an application seeking to quash a First Information Report. The court held that since the offence was disclosed during the investigation, no case existed for entertaining the application, and thus, it stood rejected.
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
crap3283.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3283 OF 2016
Varsha w/o Praful Bramhecha
and another
...Applicants
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra
and another...Respondents
.....
Shri J.V.Deshpande, advocate for the applicants
Shri D.R.Kale, A.P.P. for respondent no.1
Shri A.G.Kulkarni, advocate for respondent no.2
.....
CORAM: S.S.SHINDE & SANGITRAO S.PATIL, JJ.
DATED : 19th SEPTEMBER, 2016
PER COURT :
Heard. Perused the contents of the first
information report. Offence is disclosed during
the investigation. Therefore, no case is made out
to entertain this Application for quashing the
first information report. Hence, the Application
stands rejected.
(SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.)
dbm/crap3283.16
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal application for quashing the first information report ought to be entertained given that the offence was disclosed during investigation.
Varsha w/o Praful Bramhecha
The State of Maharashtra
S.S.Shinde
Sangitrao S.Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court