✦ Bombay High Court

CRIMINAL v. The State of Maharashtra

Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2010V R KINGAONKAR

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

..... Mr. M.A. Tandale, Advocate (appointed) for the appellant. Mr. V.D. Godbharle, APP for the respondent/State. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 6TH OCTOBER, 2010] PER COURT :

Mr. M.A. Tandale, learned Advocate, appointed as Amicus Curiae in this Appeal, shall be paid due remuneration as permissible under Section 304 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as he is appointed as Amicus Curiae, in accordance with the fees payable under the Legal Aid Scheme, as per Legal Services Authorities Act and Rules. arp/CRIAPL47.10-ADVFEES Sd/- [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE

Find similar cases Start drafting free

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.

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2010). ← Search more judgments

Judgment

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

Related cases why they’re linked — not procedural history

More cases under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Continue researching