Ratnamala Arun Udanshiv v. Kailash
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Shri Gajanan G. Kadam, Adv.for applicant. Shri S.G.Nandedkar, APP for State .... CORAM : T.V.NALAWADE,J. DATE : 02/04/2012 ORAL ORDER : 1] This application is filed by the victim for leave to file appeal against the judgment and order R.C.C. No.748/2001 which was pending in the Court of J.M.F.C. [II] Nanded. The respondents are acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323 r.w. 34 of 2 criapln4282-11 I.P.C. 2] After making query by this Court, in view of the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C., and Section 374 of Cr.P.C. the learned advocate for applicant submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw the application and liberty may be given to him to file proceeding in Sessions Court. 3] In view of the aforesaid provisions, he is allowed to withdraw the appeal. He is at liberty to contend before the Sessions Court that the period for which this Appeal was pending in this Court, may be excluded at the time of condoning the delay. Application stands disposed of. umg/criapln4282-11 (T.V.NALAWADE,J.)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 372, 374.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 02 Apr 2012. The bench was T V NALAWADE.
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.