The High Court allowed an intervention petition filed by the mother of the deceased to intervene in a criminal revision application challenging the rejection of an application for alteration of charge.
The application for intervention is allowed, and the intervenor is permitted to intervene in the revision application as a respondent.
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.
APPR 770 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 770 OF 2016 IN
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No. 680 OF 2016 Asiya Begum ….Intervenor In the matter between Sachin Hindurao Waze and Ors. ….Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ….Respondents
Mr. Sudeep Pasbola a/w. Mr. Rounak Naik a/w. Rahul Arote for Applicants in Revision No. 680 of 2016 a/w. APPR 770 of 2016
Mr. Chetank Mali Advocate for Applicant in APPR No. 770 of 2016 Mr. P.H. Gaikwad -APP for the State. ******
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. MONDAY , 8TH JANUARY, 2018
P.C.
deceased. The revision application has been preferred by the Original Accused
challenging the order rejecting the application for alteration of the charge.
permitted to intervene in the revision application.
of 2016 is directed to add the intervenors as Respondents. This intervention
1/2
V.A. Tikam
APPR 770 of 2016
application is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
[PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.]
2/2
V.A. Tikam
Sachin Hindurao Waze and Ors.
The State of Maharashtra
Asiya Begum
Prakash D. Naik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
