Petitioner sought expeditious hearing of a Sessions case. The Court found trial commenced with an examined witness; thus, writ petition is not entertained and dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 370 OF 2017
Rohit N. Verma. ..Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent.
S. D. Nangre for the Petitioner.
J. P. yagnik, APP for the State.
Coram : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. Date : April 10, 2017 .
P. C. :
[SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]
1 / 1
patilsr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition seeking expeditious hearing when the trial has already commenced.
Rohit N. Verma
State of Maharashtra
RANJIT MORE
ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
