The writ petition, listed as withdrawn, was disposed of without any substantive reasoning or legal proposition. No orders of quashing, stay, or relief were granted afresh by this court.
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.
wp 5464.22.odt
bsb
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 5464 OF 2022
Sayed Sohel Sayed Mehmood
....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
....Respondent
Mr. Satej S. Jadhav, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, A.G.P. for respondent no. 1.
CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, C.J. & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
DATED : JULY 06, 2022.
PER COURT :
. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits on
instructions that, the petitioner’s prayer clause ‘B’ stands answered and this petition is worked out.
[ RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ]
1
Sayed Sohel Sayed Mehmood
The State of Maharashtra
Dipankar Datta
Ravindra V. Ghuge
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
