The petitioner challenged the FIR via a criminal writ petition. Noting that the main case resulted in acquittal, the court held the writ petition had become infructuous and disposed of the matter.
The writ petition was disposed of on the basis that it had become infructuous following the acquittal in the main case.
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.
m1-wp-106-2020.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.106 OF 2020
MOHAMMED HASAN BJUMA AND OTHERS VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
… Mr. R. V. Patodi, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. A. M. Phule, APP for respondent No.1 – State.
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 7th October, 2022
ORDER :-
[RAJESH S. PATIL] [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI] JUDGE JUDGE
scm
(1)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for quashing the FIR stands disposed of being infructuous on account of acquittal in the main case.
Mohammed Hasan Bujma and Others
The State of Maharashtra
Vibha Kankanwadi
Rajesh S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
