HARSHADA H. SAWANT v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Arms Act, 1959 ss. 3, 25, 27
Judgment
Mr. Prashant Pawar, Advocate for Applicant. .................... ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JANUARY 21, 2025 : P.C.
Mentioned. Not on Board. Taken on Board. Heard Mr. Pawar, learned Advocate for Applicant. Perused the praecipe dated 21.01.2025 for Speaking to the Minutes of the order dated 20.01.2025.
The appearance clause of order dated 20.01.2025, be read as ‘Mr. Prashant Pawar a/w. Mr. Abhijeet Sawant, Advocates for Applicant’ instead of ‘Mr. Prashant Pawar a/w. Mr. Abhijeet Sawant, Advocates i/by Randhir Kale for Applicant’.
4.1. In line No.4 of paragraph No.2 of order dated 20.01.2025 ‘Crime No.545 of 2023’ be read as ‘Crime No.544 of 2023’ and line No.7 of the same paragraph be read as ‘Sections 3, 25, 27 of Indian Arms Act, 1959’ instead of ‘Sections 325, 327 of Indian Arms Act, 1959’. 1 of 2
Necessary corrections be carried out in the original order and corrected order be uploaded.
Praecipe is disposed. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT 2 of 2
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arms Act, 1959 — ss. 3, 25, 27.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 21 Jan 2025. The bench was MILIND N JADHAV.
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.