Mr.Anil Sadashiv Nanduskar v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 03 Aug 2007
- Bench
- B H MARLAPALLE
Provisions considered
Judgment
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant whose application for discharge was rejected by the trial Court on 22/7/2005. . In addition to the belated challenge to the 22/7/2005 raised application applicant i.e. years, applicant relied 3/12/2004 passed Court discharging co-accused Shri Pramod Sathe. The passed favour co-accused subject matter challenge before Court Criminal Revision Application No.441 2004 application Court 6/4/2005 investigation undertaken further police Section 2 173(8) Cr.P.C. a supplementary charge-sheet Shri Pramod Sathe an accused and, therefore, the discharge order dated 3/12/2004 did not survive. . It would be in the interest of the prosecution accused pending expedited ground entertain application belated stage. It stated across 3rd August 2007 Sessions Case No.241 of 2003 is listed before the trial Court for framing of charges. . The application is rejected and the trial in Sessions Case No.241 of 2003 is hereby expedited.
(B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 03 Aug 2007. The bench was B H MARLAPALLE.
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.