Disposed

Asif Abdullah Khan and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC17 Nov 2021WP/1724/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged delay in CBI investigation regarding an incident from 2017. The Court accepted instructions that investigation has substantially progressed and charge-sheet will be filed within 12 weeks, thus depriving petitioners of further cause of action. Writ petition disposed without adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners had no further grievance; writ petition disposed of.

Asif Abdullah Khan and Ors. Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

07-wp-1724-18

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1724 OF 2018

¶5

Asif Abdullah Khan & Ors. ..Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶8

..Respondents

¶9

Mr. J. A. Udaipuri i/b. M/s. Udaipuri & Co. for Petitioners. Ms. S. D. Shinde, APP for State/Respondent No.1.

¶10

Mr. Saurabh Kshirsagar h/f. Mr. Hiten S. Venegavkar for Respondent No.2 – CBI-ACB (Pune).

¶11

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ.

¶12

DATE : 17 NOVEMBER 2021

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date: 2021.11.20 11:27:50 +0530

¶15

. A limited relief sought by the Petitioners is that the C.B.I. must take a stand in the matter and the matter may not be just kept pending. According to the Petitioners, the incident has taken place around 2016 and the investigation by the C.B.I. had commenced in the year 2017, yet no further progress has taken place. Obviously the Petitioners do not demand a particular outcome of the investigation, but their anxiety is that the investigation should be completed within a time bound period.

¶16

1 of 2

¶17

Gokhale

¶18

207-wp-1724-18

¶19

The learned counsel for the Respondent – CBI states that he has received instructions that the investigation is going on and has substantially progressed, the statements under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are being recorded and the Charge-sheet will be filed within a period of 12 weeks. The statement, since having been made on instructions, is accepted.

¶20

The learned counsel for the Petitioners states that, in view of the statement that the Charge-sheet will be filed within a period of 12 weeks, at this stage, the Petitioners have no further grievance.

¶21

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶22

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶23

2 of 2

Asif Abdullah Khan and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asif Abdullah Khan and Ors. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shital Alias Nitin Bhimrao Kharat Vs the District Magistrate Satara and Anr.

Abu Bakar Umer Solanki Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohammed Rashid Nasir Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ashok Gangadhar Ratnaparkhi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Pradeep S/O Gajanan Dangate and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Karankumar Bhatia and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.