Allowed

Amar S. Mulchandani v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Mar 2021IA/905/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This interim application sought to admit the Applicant as petitioner No.2 in a pending criminal writ petition. The court allowed the application, permitting amendment to the pleadings. The contentions on merits were kept open for the main hearing.

What did the court decide?

Interim Application allowed to implead the Applicant as Petitioner No.2 with permission to amend pleadings.

Amar S. Mulchandani Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

Laxmikant Digitally signed by Laxmikant G. G. Chandan Chandan Date: 2021.03.1918:28:29 +0530

¶2

(917) IA-905.21.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.905 OF 2021 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.4134 OF 2019

¶5

Amar S Mulchandani …. Applicant

¶6

In the matter between

¶7

Amarjeetsingh Mohindersingh Basi … Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State of Maharashtra & another

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

Mr. Ravi Kadam, Sr. Advocate a/w Mr. Karan Kadam i/by Mr. S S Bedekar for the Applicant.

¶12

Mr. Deepak Thakre, PP, a/w Mrs. A S Pai, APP for the Respondent/State. Dr. Milind Sathe, Sr. Advocate a/w Mr. J G Aradwad for Respondent No.2

¶13

CORAM :S. S. SHINDE,

¶14

MANISH PITALE, JJ
DATE :19th MARCH 2021

¶15

P.C.

¶16

1Heard Mr. Ravi Kadam, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for

¶17

the Applicant, Mr. Milind Sathe, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for

¶18

contesting Respondent No.2, and Mrs. A S Pai, the learned APP appearing for
Respondent/State.

¶19

2Mr. Milind Sathe, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

¶20

contesting Respondent, on instructions, submits that he has no objection for

¶21

lgc 1 of 2

¶22

(917) IA-905.21.odt

¶23

allowing this Interim Application which is filed by the Intervener/Applicant for
impleading him as party Petitioner No.2.

¶24

3 Hence this Interim Application is allowed.

¶25

4Necessary amendment to be carried out forthwith. Since the
Petitioner No.1 has discharged his advocate as he is not interested in pursuing
this Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the Applicant/Intervener is
permitted to carry out necessary amendment.

¶26

5The contentions raised on merits in the Interim Application are
kept open for being agitated during the course of hearing of the Writ Petition.
The Interim Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶27

[MANISH PITALE, J][S. S. SHINDE , J]

¶28

2 of 2

¶29

lgc

Amar S. Mulchandani v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar S. Mulchandani v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kripal Amrik Singh and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Akshit Vimal Sharma and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vishwas Vishwanath Acharekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Pravin Ganpat Kakad Vs the Commissioner of Police and Ors.

Banani Uttamkumar Samanta on Behalf of 1) Uttam Samanta and 2) Gautam Samanta Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Khurshid Liyakat Khan (Illiyas Gulab Shaikh Detenu) Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.