The High Court dismissed a criminal application challenging an impugned order rejecting a petition to stay proceedings pending a Supreme Court SLP. The Court held there was no merit in the claim given the SLP remains provisional and no stay was granted.
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.
bipin prithiani
1
907-apl-979.23.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 979 OF 2023
Amar Ranu … Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents
Mr Nitesh S. Nevshe for the Applicant. Mr H. J. Dedhia, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. Mr Pritam P. Runwal a/w Anil B. Khopde for Respondent No.2.
CORAM: R. N. LADDHA, J.
DATE : 8 SEPTEMBER 2023
P.C. :-
. Heard Mr Nitesh Nevshe, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr H. J. Dedhia learned APP for respondent State, and Mr Pritam Runwal, the learned counsel for the second respondent.
“Perused application and say filed on it by other side. Heard Ld. Advocate for Complainant and Accused in person. There is no stay order obtained by accused till today and matter is directed to dispose within 6 months by Hon’ble High Court. Hence this application is rejected.”
bipin prithiani
2
907-apl-979.23.doc
“10. On perusal of the complaint it can be seen that, the averments in the complaint makes out prima facie case for issuance of process against the accused for offence under Section 500 of IPC. The learned Magistrate had issued process for the aforesaid offence. The order issuing process need not be elaborate or in detail. The order reflects application of mind. There is no substance in the submissions that the Order issuing process lacked territorial jurisdiction or it was mandatory to conduct inquiry under Section 202(1) of Cr.P.C.”
bipin prithiani
3
907-apl-979.23.doc
R. N. LADDHA, J.
BIPIN DHARMENDERPRITHIANI Digitally signed by BIPINDHARMENDER PRITHIANIDate: 2023.09.08 18:04:18 +0530
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the rejection of criminal application is valid despite a pending Supreme Court SLP on the same matter.
Whether the learned Magistrate proceeding with the trial despite a High Court direction to conclude within six months.
Whether the submission regarding territorial jurisdiction lacks merit when process has been issued.
Amar Ranu
State of Maharashtra
Respondent No.2
R. N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
