Disposed

Satyabhama Wd/O Ramprasad Nakashe v. Bhushan Govind Ramteke and Others

Bombay HC28 Jan 2021APPA/832/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, disposed of a Criminal Application filed by the deceased's mother seeking leave to prefer an appeal against acquittal under Section 372 CrPC. Citing Mallikarjun Kodagali vs. State of Karnataka, the court held that appeal against acquittal is a substantial right of the victim, rendering leave unnecessary, and disposed of the application.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Application stands disposed of without granting leave for the appeal as it is a substantial right of the victim.

Satyabhama Wd/O Ramprasad Nakashe Vs Bhushan… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

2801appa832.17

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 832 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2018

¶5

(Satyabhama wd/o Ramprasad Nakashe vs. Mr. Bhushan Govind Ramteke & Ors.)

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,__________________________________________________________________________
appearances, Court's orders of directionsCourt's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.

¶7

Shri C.B. Barve, Advocate for the applicant -
appellant
Shri P.S. Wathore, Advocate for non-applicant –
respondent Nos. 1 to 8.

¶8

Shri N.R. Rode, APP for non-applicant – respondent
No. 9.

¶9

CORAM : PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J. JANUARY 28, 2021.

¶10

Heard Shri Barve, learned counsel for the
applicant – appellant, Shri Wathore, learned counsel
for non-applicant – respondent Nos. 1 to 8 and Shri
N.R. Rode, learned APP for the non-applicant –
respondent No. 9.

¶11

2.In this application, the appellant –
mother of the deceased sought leave under proviso to
Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prefer
appeal against acquittal of the respondents/ accused
for the offence punishable under Section 306 read
with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

¶13

2801appa832.17

¶14

3.Considering the judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Mallikarjun Kodagali vs.
State of Karnataka & Ors., reported at (2019) 2 SCC
752, wherein it is held that it is a substantial right of
the victim for exercising this right, no leave is
required to be sought. In this view of the matter,
Criminal Application stands disposed of.

¶15

4. S.O. four weeks for admission.

¶16

JUDGE

¶17

*GS.

Satyabhama Wd/O Ramprasad Nakashe v. Bhushan Govind Ramteke and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyabhama Wd/O Ramprasad Nakashe v. Bhushan Govind Ramteke and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kushal Kawaduji Singanjude Vs Ramnarayan Durgaprasad Agrawal (Kejadiwal)

The State of Mah. Thr. P.S.O., P.S. Wadgaon Road, Yavatmal Vs Arun S/O Vasantrao Meshram

Ajay Bhaskar Kulkarni Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Gadge Nagar Eow Amravati

Sau. Mayuri W/O Sumit Junankar Vs Sumit Diliprao Junankar

Shri Sunil S/O Baburao Torkad Vs State of Mah, Thr Pso,Yavatmal

Sunil @ Pavnya Shamrao Meshram Vs the State of Mah., Thr. Pso Tq Lakhandur Dist Bhandara