Allowed
Kirti v. Ambani v Union of India and Anr.
Bombay HCAPL/56/2017
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
The application was allowed to be withdrawn as the original applicant had expired. No order as to costs was passed.
What did the court decide?
Application allowed to be withdrawn; No order as to costs.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
73-apl-56-2017.odt
¶2
rrpillai
¶3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 56 OF 2017
¶4
Mr. Kirti V. Ambani … Applicant vs.
¶5
Union of India & Anr. … Respondent
¶6
Mr. Pawan Mali for the Applicant. Ms. N. S. Jain, APP for the State.
¶7
CORAM : A. K. MENON, J. DATE : 11 th JULY, 2017
¶8
- P.C.:
¶9
- Mentioned at 5.00 pm.
¶10
- Learned Advocate for the applicant states that he has been instructed
¶11
- to withdraw this petition as the original applicant has expired. In the circumstances, I pass the following order :
¶12
- (i) Application allowed to be withdrawn.
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- applicant
Mr. Kirti V. Ambani
- respondent
Union of India
Coram
AI extract
A. K. Menon
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court