Single-judge order dismissing criminal applications filed for expeditious hearing of appeals against acquittal. Court held no precedence exists for listing such appeals before the Final Hearing Board.
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.
5-APPA-443-2018.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.443 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1630 OF 2011
AND
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.442 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1631 OF 2011
M/S.PINAK BHARAT AND COMPANY
)...APPLICANT
V/s.
ANIL RAMRAO NAIK AND ANOTHER
)...RESPONDENT
Mr.Prerak Sharma i/b. Mr.Rakesh Pathak, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr.Veerdhawal Deshmukh i/b. V.S.Kapse, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
Mr.S.V.Gavand, APP for the Respondent - State.
CORAM : A. M. BADAR, J.
DATE : 4th APRIL 2018
avk 1/3
5-APPA-443-2018.doc
P.C. :
1 These are applications by the applicant/original complainant M/s.Pinak Bharat and Company for expeditious hearing of the appeals filed by it challenging acquittal of respondent no.1 of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2 The learned Advocate appearing for the applicant/appellant drew my attention to the order dated 11th April 2016 passed by this court and submitted that as per this order, the appeals were to be listed for final hearing in the week commencing from 13th June 2016 and therefore, it be listed for final hearing. The learned Advocate appearing for the respondent no.1/original accused has no objection for listing the appeals for final hearing.
3 The Final Hearing Board of this court is comprising of appeals wherein the appellants are undergoing jail sentence after their conviction and therefore, as per judgment of the Honourable
avk 2/3
5-APPA-443-2018.doc
1 Apex Court in the matter of Hussain vs. Union of India , no precedence can be given to the appeals challenging acquittal. Therefore, the order :
ORDER
The applications are rejected.
(A. M. BADAR, J.)
1 2017 (5) SCC 702
avk 3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal challenging acquittal should be listed for hearing before the Final Hearing Board.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hussain vs. Union of IndiaReferred¶22
Hussain vs. Union of India
M/S.PINAK BHARAT AND COMPANY
ANIL RAMRAO NAIK
A. M. BADAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
