Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 13]

Bombay High Court

Narayan Arjun Gaonkar vs The State Of Maharasthra on 21 December, 2016

Author: V.K. Tahilramani

Bench: V.K. Tahilramani, Mridula Bhatkar

                                                                                 4b. cri wp 4290-16.doc


RMA      
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION




                                                                                                
                          CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4290 OF 2016




                                                                        
            Narayan Arjun Gaonkar                                        .. Petitioner

                                 Versus




                                                                       
            The State of Maharashtra                                     .. Respondent

                                                  ...................
            Appearances




                                                            
            Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate (appointed) for the Petitioner
            Mr. H.J. Dedia      APP for the State
                                              
                                     ...................
                                             
                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
                              DATE        :   DECEMBER 21, 2016.
              
           



            ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :

1. Heard both sides.

2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. By Judgment & Order dated 8.10.1993 passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 956 of 1998, the petitioner was convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. Being aggrieved by the said jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2016 00:56:06 ::: 4b. cri wp 4290-16.doc conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No. 678 of 1993 before this Court. The said appeal was dismissed by this Court on 7.12.2015. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been granted set off in the said case. If the contention of the petitioner is correct, then set off be granted to the petitioner as envisaged under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

      
   



    [ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ]           [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]






    jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                         2 of 2


           ::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2016               ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2016 00:56:06 :::