Parents-in-law sought quashing of an FIR under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 r/w 34 IPC alleging vague accusations. The court issued notice returnable in eight weeks and directed that no charge-sheet be filed against the applicants without leave while investigation continued.
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.
26-apl 682-24.odt
1/2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 682 OF 2024
Sunil Gajanan Adetwar and one other -Vs-State of Maharashtra and anr.
Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
Court's or Judge's Orders.
Ms.Shreya Bhagat counsel h/f Mr.A.S.Ambatkar, counsel for the applicants. Mr.Nikhil Joshi, A.P.P for non-applicant -State.
CORAM VINAY JOSHI & MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 8th May, 2024.
Kavita
26-apl 682-24.odt
2/2
JUDGE
JUDGE
Signed by: Kavita P Tayade Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Kavita Date: 09/05/2024 17:10:08
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sunil Gajanan Adetwar and one other
State of Maharashtra
Non-applicant No.2
Vinay Joshi
Vrushali V. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
