Dismissed

Pooja W/O. Amit Jain v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., P.S. Ambazari, Nagpur

Bombay HC17 Jan 2022APL/1183/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, withdrew a criminal application after the applicant requested permission to withdraw it. The court accepted the withdrawal, rejected the application accordingly, and vacated any interim orders without providing detailed reasons.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of criminal application allowed; application dismissed; interim order vacated.

Pooja W/O. Amit Jain Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

apl1183.18 5

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.1183/2018 Pooja w/o Amit Jain

¶5

..vs..

¶6

The State of Mah., thr.PSO PS Ambazari, Nagpur, Tahsil and District Nagpur and anr

¶7

................................................................................................................................................................... OfÏce Notes, OfÏce Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders

¶8

................................................................................................................................................................... Shri Muzammil Hussain, Counsel for the Applicant. Shri T.A.Mirza, Addl.P.P. for the State.

¶9

CORAM : V.M.DESHPANDE & G.A.SANAP, JJ. DATED : JANUARY 17, 2022

¶10

1.Hearing was conducted through Video
Conferencing and learned counsel for parties agree that
Audio and Visual Quality was proper.

¶11

2. Heard learned counsel Shri Muzammil Hussain
for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor
Shri T.A.Mirza for the State. Also, perused reply filed on
behalf of the State agency.

¶12

3. After hearing learned counsel for the applicant
and after perusing the reply filed on behalf of the State and
when the Court was about to reject the application, learned
counsel for the applicant submitted that permission be given
to the applicant to withdraw the application.

¶13

The statement is accepted.

¶14

4. The criminal application is rejected as

¶15

withdrawn.

¶16

.....2/-

¶17

apl1183.18 5

¶18

¶19

5. Since learned counsel for the applicant is
withdrawing the application, the Court is not giving detailed
reasons as to why the application needs rejection.

¶20

6. Needless to mention that interim order stands

¶21

vacated.

¶22

JUDGE JUDGE

¶23

!! BRW !! Digitally signed by BHUSHAN BHUSHAN RANA RANA WANKHEDE WANKHEDE Date: 2022.01.17 16:26:10 +0530

¶24

!! BRW !!

¶25

...../-

Pooja W/O. Amit Jain v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., P.S. Ambazari, Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pooja W/O. Amit Jain v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., P.S. Ambazari, Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rushikesh S/O Sudarshan Bhidkar Vs the State of Mah, Thr P.So. Karanja Distt. Washim

Suresh S/O. Somaji Bhoyar Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its P.S.O., P.S. Gadchiroli

Sandeep S/O Purushottam Bansod Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Bajaj Nagar, Nagpur Tha. and Dist Nagpur and Another

Giridhar S/O Digambar Tijare Vs State of Mah. Thr. P.S.O. Katol, Tehsil, Katol, Distt. Nagpur. and Another

Lakshya @ Lucky S/O Sanjay Turkel Vs State Ofmah. Thr. Deputy Commissionr of Police Zone NO.2 Sitabuldi Nagpur and Another

Surendra @ Sonu Tambi Pillay Vs State of Mah., Thr. P.S.O. P.S. Juni Kamptee, Distnagpur and Another