Dismissed

Raj Arvind Patel v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Dec 2023APL/1450/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court criminally appellate jurisdiction directed the Metropolitan Magistrate to conclude the trial of the applicant for s. 354 and s. 354-A IPC within six months due to his pending education in the USA.

What did the court decide?

The Metropolitan Magistrate, 26th Court, Borivali, Mumbai is directed to conclude the trial bearing C.C. No. 2969/PW/2021 within six months from today.

Raj Arvind Patel Vs State of Maharashtra and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

04-APL-1450-23.odt

¶2

1 / 3

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1450 OF 2023

¶5

Raj Arvind Patel.... Applicant

¶6

 versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr..... Respondents

¶8

Mr. Imtiyaz Patel a/w Abdul Latif Shaikh, Advocate for Applicant.

¶9

Ms. Sangita D. Shinde, APP for the State/Respondent.

¶10

CORAM: SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE: 22nd DECEMBER, 2023

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1. The Applicant has preferred this application for

¶13

directions to the Metropolitan Magistrate, 26^th Court, Borivali,

¶14

Mumbai, to conclude the trial bearing C.C. No.2969/PW/2021
within a period of six months.

¶15

2. Heard Mr. Imtiyaz Patel, learned counsel for the

¶16

Digitally signed by MANUSHREE MANUSHREE NESARIKAR NESARIKAR Date: 2023.12.22 14:47:37 +0530

¶17

Applicant and Ms. Sangita D. Shinde, learned APP for the State.

¶18

Nesarikar

¶19

2 / 3 04-APL-1450-23.odt

¶20

3. The Applicant is facing the trial which arises out of the
investigation in C.R.No.1020/2021 dated 12/09/2021 registered
at Borivali Police Station u/s 354, 354-A(1)(2) of the Indian
Penal Code. The incident was dated 03/09/2021.

¶21

4. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that at the
time of alleged incident, the Applicant was a student. He has
now completed his degree education. He has got admission in
an university in the USA. He is also granted scholarship.
However, because of this pending prosecution he was unable to
join the course last year. The Applicant’s admission is still
continuing, but only because of the pending prosecution, he is
unable to pursue further studies, even after securing admission
and scholarship in a foreign university. He submitted that the
first informant had given no objection at the time of
consideration of the Bail Application of the present Applicant
before the Magistrate’s Court. He therefore submitted that, in
the interest of justice, it is necessary that the trial is expedited.
He submitted that though learned Magistrate is burdened with

¶22

3 / 3 04-APL-1450-23.odt

¶23

the other pending cases, the Applicant’s career and future are at
stake. The main evidence would be that of the victim herself and
that the trial will get over soon after it starts.

¶24

5. I find substance in the submissions of learned counsel
for the Applicant and therefore on humanitarian grounds, his
future can be taken into consideration. Hence the trial can be
made time bound.

¶25

6. Hence, the following order :

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

(i) The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 26^th Court, Borivali, Mumbai, is directed to conclude the trial bearing C.C. No.2969/PW/2021, within a period of six months from today.

¶28

(ii)The application is disposed of.

¶29

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Raj Arvind Patel v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Arvind Patel v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balu Appa Khavare Vs State of Maharashtra

Deepanjali Shivanand Potdar Vs M/S. Matter Toys (India ) Pvt. Ltd., and Anr.

Kadiri Muhammad Ali Vs State of Maharashtra

Hifzur Rehman Ansari and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Deepak Sitaram Modhe Vs State of Maharashtra

Seema Amruta Keswad Vs State of Maharashtra