The bench directed the applicant to serve Respondent No. 2 via all legal modes within six weeks due to the respondent's non-residence at the given address. Failure to prove service will result in dismissal.
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.
Ingale 85-apl-262-24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
URMILA Digitally signedby URMILA PRAMOD PRAMODINGALE INGALE Date: 2024.08.2810:50:12 +0530
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 262 OF 2024
Dhanashree Ladoba Gaonkar
… Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and anr. … Respondents
Mr. Viral Rathod a/w Mr.Vishwatej Jadhav, for Applicant. Mr. Anand S. Shalgaonkar, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 21st August 2024.
P.C. :
( DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J. )
( A.S. GADKARI, J. )
1/1
Dhanashree Ladoba Gaonkar
The State of Maharashtra and anr.
A. S. Gadkari
Dr. Neela Gokhale
As recorded by the court registry
19 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
