Dismissed

Gem Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. through Sandhya Vakil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Apr 2019WP/1333/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging alleged police inaction, the High Court held that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 156(3) CrPC and dismissed the petition without examining merits, directing the magistrate to decide independently on any future complaint.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed on the ground of existence of alternative remedy under Section 156(3) CrPC.

Gem Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. through Sandhya Vakil Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

48 wp 1333.19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.1333 of 2019

¶4

Gem Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. versus The State of Maharashtra and ors.

¶5

…...Petitioner

¶6

…....Respondents

¶7

Mr. R. Raghwaracharallya along with Ms.Heena Rathore I/b. Kulkarni & Associates, advocates for the petitioner. Mrs. Aruna S. Pai, APP for the State.

¶8

CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, JJ. DATE : 15^th APRIL, 2019.

¶9

P. C. :

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for

¶11

the State.

¶12

A short grievance made in the petition is that Oshiwara Police Station has not taken any action on the complaint dated 13^th October, 2018 filed by the petitioner, a copy of which is annexed at “Exhibit-C”, page 43 of the petition.

¶13

Learned APP, on instructions, makes a statement that the said compliant of the petitioner was enquired into and it was found that no such incident as alleged by the petitioner has occurred on 13^th October, 2018. This conclusion was communicated to the petitioner by Senior Police Inspector, Oshiwara Police Station by his communication dated

¶14

Shubhada S Kadam 1/2

¶15

48 wp 1333.19.doc

¶16

30^th March, 2019. This fact is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶17

In the light of the above, we are not inclined to entertain the petition especially when the petitioner, being aggrieved by the said communication, has an alternative remedy of approaching a magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.PC.”). The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶18

It is made clear that we have not gone into the merits of the matter and, in the event, the petitioner files a complaint under Section 156(3) of the Cr.PC., the learned magistrate shall deal with the same independently on its own merits and without being influenced by the order of this Court.

¶19

[SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]

¶20

Shubhada S Kadam 2/2

Gem Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. through Sandhya Vakil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gem Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. through Sandhya Vakil v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rishi Techtex Limited Vs Union of India and Ors.

Manish D. Khandelwal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sunil Mangilal Jain Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

A.C. Narayanan. and Anr. . Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

A Ramalingam Ramesh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sachin Dnyaneshwar Chougule Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.