Petitioner requested to withdraw the criminal writ petition. The court allowed the withdrawal, keeping all contentions open, as ownership disputes were to be decided in the pending criminal trial.
Petition allowed to be withdrawn; all contentions kept open.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.
wp2245.2016
1/1
Dusane
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2245 OF 2016
Mr. Nazar Abbas Sayed .... Petitioner
Vs.
Mrs. Amreen Fatima Nazar Abbas Sayed & Ors. .... Respondents
Mr. Nitin Gangal, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. N.S. Jain, A.P.P. for the respondent- State.
Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. Date : 20th February, 2017
P.C.
1 Mr. Gangal, the learned advocate for the petitioner states that he does not press the present petition in view of the observations of this court in the order dtd. 12th January, 2016 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.2877 of 2014 that the issue of ownership of the ornaments in dispute can be decided at the final hearing in C.R. No. 839 of 2013, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.1, Thane. The petition is allowed to be withdrawn. Needless to mention that all the contentions of the petitioner raised in the petition are kept open.
(Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J.)
Dusane
Mrs. Amreen Fatima Nazar Abbas Sayed & Ors.
R.P. SondurBaldota
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
