The High Court of Bombay adjudicated a writ petition challenging an interim order on child custody. The Court declined to interfere, holding that the Sessions Judge should decide the pending appeal based on the child's best interest.
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 BOMBAY AT GOA
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 92 OF 2018
RUPESH H. SATARDEKAR AND 2 ORS., ... Petitioners
Versus
RASHI RUPESH SATARDEKAR., ... Respondent
Shri Vibhav Rajiv Amonkar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri Shailesh Redkar, Advocate under Legal Aid Scheme for the Respondent.
Coram:C. V. BHADANG, J.
Date:27th June 2018
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Shri Amonkar, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri Redkar, the learned Counsel for the respondent.
WPCR/92/2018
2
The petition is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid
WPCR/92/2018
3
terms, with no order as to costs.
C. V. BHADANG, J.
EV
RUPESH H. SATARDEKAR AND 2 ORS.
RASHI RUPESH SATARDEKAR.
C. V. BHADANG
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
