The application was rejected because the applicant failed to appear on the hearing date. The court held that the application was made in person and rejected it without any appearance on behalf of 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.
ASN
1/2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 367 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 642 OF 2013
Milind Hanumant Shinde ….Applicant. vs. The State of Maharashtra ….Respondent.
None for the Applicant. Ms. M.H. Mhatre, APP. for the State.
CORAM:B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & MRS. SWAPNA S. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 19th July, 2019
PC:
Mohit Choudhary as on 15.3.2019 refused to argue the matter. On
12.4.2019, learned amicus Shri. Phanse so also Advocate
Aniket Vagal were present. Advocate Vagal was permitted to file
Vakalatnama after depositing cost of Rs.5000/-.Vakalatnama has been filed and cost amount has also been deposited on 24.4.2019.
2/2
Milind Hanumant Shinde
The State of Maharashtra
B.P.DHARMADHIKARI
SWAPNA S. JOSHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
