In Criminal Writ Petition No. 686 of 2016, the court directed the petitioner to 2/2 SQ Pathan on 11th June 2018 against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petition sought the transfer of investigation for a property-related dispute.
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.
wp.686.16.6.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 686 OF 2016
Shailesh Babubhai Waghela ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
Ms. Gulestan M. Dubash i/b Mr. Durgesh Jaiswal and Ms. Sartaj Shaikh for the Petitioner
Mr. K. V. Saste, A.P.P for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2-State
PI Mr. Ashok Gaikwad from V. P. Road Police Station, is present
CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ. MONDAY, 11th JUNE, 2018
P.C. :
1 The above Petition has been filed for transfer of investigation from the V. P. Road Police Station to Crime Branch, CID, Mumbai. This relief was founded on the fact that the arrest of the Respondents 5 and 6
was not being effected. This Court, on the last occasion i.e. on 2nd May,
2018, had accordingly deferred the hearing of the above Writ Petition to today (wrongly mentioned in the order as 10th June 2018).
1/2
SQ Pathan
wp.686.16.6.doc
2 Today, the learned A.P.P Mr. K. V. Saste, on instructions of the Investigating Officer Mr. Ashok Gaikwad, Police Inspector, V. P. Road Police Station, states that the Respondent No. 5, who is the husband of the Respondent No. 6 has been arrested. Insofar as, the Respondent No. 6 is concerned, the learned A.P.P states that the allegation against her in the FIR is that she was present when talks in respect of the sale of flat to the Petitioner were held. He further states that no overt act as such has been attributed to the Respondent No. 6. Hence, insofar as the Respondent No. 6 is concerned, the learned A.P.P states that it would be contingent upon the role of the Respondent No. 6 that would be revealed during investigation that a decision would be taken to effect her arrest or not.
3 We, by accepting the said statement and having regard to the
relief sought in the above Petition, dispose of the above Petition.
REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. R. M. SAVANT, J.
2/2
SQ Pathan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant a transfer of investigation from V.P. Road Police Station to Crime Branch given the status of arrests.
Shailesh Babubhai Waghela
The State of Maharashtra
R. M. Savant
Revati Mohite Dere
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
