The High Court of Bombay disposed of a criminal writ petition without adjudication on merits, informing the petitioner that an alternate statutory remedy exists before the trial court following the filing of the charge-sheet.
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-wp2316.2016.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2316 OF 2016
Ryan Verghese …..Petitioner
Vs.
The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. …..Respondents
Adv. H.H. Nagi a/w Adv. Ameya Vaidya i/by Nagi & Nagi Associates for the Petitioner.
Mr. J.P. Yagnik APP, for the Respondent-State.
Adv. Chaula Solanki a/w Adv. Divya Bhatnagar for the Respondent No.2.
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ. DATE : 8th FEBRUARY, 2024.
P.C.:-
having alternate statutory remedy under the provisions of Cr. P. C. before the trial Court.
(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)
Digitally signed by SANJIV SHARNAPPA SANJIV MASHALKAR SHARNAPPA MASHALKAR Date: 2024.02.12 18:45:08 +0530
1/1
Ryan Verghese
The State Of Maharashtra
A. S. Gadkari
Shyam C. Chandak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
