The High Court of Bombay Criminal Appeal bench disposed of the writ petition. It declined to direct police registration as Section 156(3) CPC was the appropriate remedy regarding administrative harassment particulars were absent.
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.
Digitally signed by SMITA SMITA JOHNSON JOHNSON GONSALVES GONSALVES Date: 2021.10.11 12:50:04 +0530
48.wp2820-21.doc
1/2
sg
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2820 OF 2021
Sharad Nandasukhlal Shroff And Anr. .. Petitioners v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. Rajendra Sorankar, for the Petitioners.
Ms. S.D. Shinde, APP, for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Karansingh Rajput, for the Intervenor.
CORAM: NITIN JAMDAR & SARANG V. KOTWAL JJ.
DATE : 6 OCTOBER 2021.
P.C:-
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
1 of 2
48.wp2820-21.doc
2/2
sg
irrespective of the opinion by the Investigating Authority regarding the merits of the allegations of the complainant.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
2 of 2
Sharad Nandasukhlal Shroff And Anr.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Nitin Jamdar
Sarang V. Kotwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
