In a Public Interest Litigation matter, the petitioner appeared in person; filed a contempt petition. The High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissed the contempt petition, noting that it could not be pursued substantively and disposed of it accordingly.
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.
suresh
5-CP-475.2015.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.475 OF 2015 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.167 OF 2014
Prakash Ganpat Sawant .... Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Others .... Respondents
Petitioner in-person Absent. Ms R.A. Salunkhe, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 to 4 & 7. Mr. Ramesh D. Rane for Respondent Nos.5, 6 & 8.
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & R.I. CHAGLA, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2019
P.C:
The petitioner, appearing in person, is absent. The contempt petition cannot be pursued as if it is a substantive matter in which further and additional relief can be granted. It is disposed of.
(R.I. CHAGLA, J.) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Page 1 of 1
Prakash Ganpat Sawant
The State of Maharashtra
S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
R.I. CHAGLA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
