The Single Judge disposed of Criminal Application No. 366 of 2016 as infructuous at the suggestion of the learned Advocate appearing for the applicant.
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.
(11)APPANo.3662016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.366 OF 2016 IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.871 OF 2015
Rajesh Venkatesh Sinnarkar ... Applicant V/s.
The State of Maharashtra (ACB) Mumbai
... Respondent
Mr.Virendra V. Pethe, Advocate for the Applicant.
Ms.Anamika Malhotra, APP for the Respondent/State.
CORAM : A.M.BADAR J.
DATED : 22nd MARCH 2018.
P.C. :
1 The learned Advocate appearing for the applicant submits that with passage of time, the application is rendered infructurous.
2 In this view of the matter, the application is disposed of as being infructuous.
(A.M.BADAR J.)
1/1
Gaikwad RD
Rajesh Venkatesh Sinnarkar
The State of Maharashtra (ACB) Mumbai
A.M. Badariya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
