Santosh Madhukar Mahabdi v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 406, 420, 471
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. In our view, the Petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing an application for discharge at an appropriate stage in the Trial Court. Therefore, no case is out for quashing the FIR registered against the Petitioner by this Court under Article 226 of the…
Judgment
Mr.Sanskar Marathe i/b. Sahil Mahajan for Petitioner Mrs.M.H. Mhatre -APP for the State ******** ******** CORAM: V.M. KANADE & P.D KODE, JJ. DATE: 5th March, 2012 P.C.
#1. The Petitioner has filed this petition for quashing the FIR which is registered for the offences punishable under sections 420, 406 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Khalapur Police Station on
23.9.2000. 2 (wp 22 of 2012)
#2. In our view, the Petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing an application for discharge at an appropriate stage in the Trial Court. Therefore, no case is out for quashing the FIR registered against the Petitioner by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Writ petition is, therefore, disposed of. Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to file an application for discharge. If such an application is filed, it may be disposed of expeditiously. (P.D.KODE J.) (V.M. KANADE J.) V.A.Tikam
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 406, 420, 471; Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 05 Mar 2012. The bench was P D KODE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.