Disposed

Anantha Narayanan Iyer v. Union of India and Ors.

Bombay HC5 Apr 2024IA/270/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought leave to withdraw an interim application filed for recording compliance of the order dated 11 November 2023, noting several confusing amendments. The court found nothing survived since compliance was undisputed, disposed the application as withdrawn and granted liberty to file a fresh application with the same prayers.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh application seeking the same prayers as in the withdrawn interim application.

Anantha Narayanan Iyer Vs Union of India and Ors. — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

NISHA Digitally signed byNISHA SANDEEP SANDEEP CHITNIS Date: 2024.04.10 CHITNIS 16:51:23 +0530

¶2

906-ia.270.2024.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.270 OF 2024 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3446 OF 2022

¶6

Anantha Narayan Iyer ...Applicant

¶7

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:

¶8

Anantha Narayan Iyer ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and Ors. ...Respondents

¶9

Mr. Ramiz Shaikh a/w Mr. Harshil Gandhi i/b Rizwan Merchant and Associates, for the Applicant.

¶10

Mr. Shekhar Mane i/b Mr. Shreeram Shirsat, for the Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4.

¶11

Mr. Sandesh Patil a/w Mr. Chintan Shah, for the Respondent No.2ED.

¶12

Mr. H. S. Venegavkar, P.P. a/w Ms. Divya Gontia i/b Mr. Pradeep Yadav, for the Respondent No.6 – SFIO.

¶13

Ms. A. S. Gotad, A.P.P for the Respondent – State.

¶14

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE & MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.

¶15

DATE : 5^th APRIL 2024

1/3

N. S. Chitnis

906-ia.270.2024.doc

P.C. :

Learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave to withdraw the Interim Application, as the said application was filed for recording compliance of the order dated 11^th November 2023 and subsequently, several amendments were carried out in the application.

¶21

We find it difficult to comprehend the Interim Application, in view of the several amendments made. The amendments made had no bearing to the initial application and hence, we grant liberty to the applicant to file a fresh application seeking the very same prayers as sought for in the aforesaid interim application.

¶22

The substantive prayer i.e. the original prayer in the interim application was as under;

¶23

“17 .... ....

¶24

“a. This Hon’ble Court be pleased to record compliance of the Order dated 11.11.2023 and take up the Criminal Writ Petition for final hearing and disposal.”

2/3

N. S. Chitnis

906-ia.270.2024.doc

It is not in dispute that the applicant has complied with the

¶29

order dated 11^th November 2023 and as such nothing survives for further consideration in this interim application.

¶30

Needless to state, that as stated earlier, we permit the applicant to file a fresh application seeking the very same reliefs as sought for by way of an amendment to the aforesaid interim application.

¶31

Interim Application is accordingly disposed of as

¶32

withdrawn, with liberty as prayed.

¶33

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this

¶34

order.

¶35

MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶36

3/3

¶37

N. S. Chitnis

Anantha Narayanan Iyer v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anantha Narayanan Iyer v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akhtar Hasan Rizvi Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Saurabh Srivastava Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Dnyaneshwar Shantaram Rode Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Jaydrath Pralhad Kakade Vs State of Maharashtra

Chintan Arvind Shah Vs State of Maharashtra

Vitthal Krishna Mhaske Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.