The Gujarat High Court disposed of three special criminal applications on the ground that the petitioner had been acquitted and the petitions were not pressed as having become infructuous.
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.
R/SCR.A/3668/2019 ORDER DATED: 10/02/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3668 of 2019 With R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3798 of 2019 With R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3808 of 2019
==========================================================
SANDIP JITENDRA JOSHI
Versus STATE OF GUJARAT
========================================================== Appearance:
MR ANURAG RATHOD, ADVOCATE for MALAYKUMAR S PATEL(8901) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MS M D MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 10/02/2022 COMMON ORAL ORDER
Heard learned Advocate Mr. Anurag Rathod for learned Advocate Mr. Malaykumar S. Patel for the petitioner and learned APP Ms. M.D. Mehta for the respondent-State.
Learned Advocate Mr. Anurag Rathod would submit that the trial with regard to the impugned complaints has already been concluded and the petitioner has been acquitted. Having regard to the same, he would not press these petitions as having become infructuous.
In that view of the matter, these petitions stand disposed of as not pressed as having become infructuous.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
BDSONGARA
Page 1 of 1
Sandip Jitendra Joshi
State of Gujarat
Nikhil S. Kariel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
