The High Court allowed an intervention application in an anticipatory bail petition. The Court directed that the underlying application be amended to include the complainant as respondent No.2.
Direction to amend the anticipatory bail application by adding the complainant as respondent No.2.
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.
38.IA.995.22.doc .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Digitally signed by BALAJI BALAJIGOVINDRAO GOVINDRAOPANCHAL PANCHAL Date: 2022.09.16 10:16:28 +0530
INTERVENTION APPLICATION NO.955 OF 2022 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3131 OF 2021
Sarita Sarabjit Chauhan
..Applicant/Intervenor
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Vinay Kumar Dinesh Gupta ..Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent
None for Applicant/Intervenor. Mr. Narendra Sharma, for the Applicant. Mr. A. A. Palkar, APP for Respondent No.1/State.
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.
DATE : 14th SEPTEMBER, 2022
P.C.
[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]
BGP. 1 o f 1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow the intervention application in the anticipatory bail petition.
Whether to amend the application by adding the complainant as an additional respondent.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vinay Kumar Dinesh Gupta
The State of Maharashtra
Sarita Sarabjit Chauhan
Nitin W. Sambre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
