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 0, Cited by 1]

Bombay High Court

Sharmin Manish Dham vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 18 April, 2017

Author: V.K. Tahilramani

Bench: V.K. Tahilramani, M.S. Karnik

                                                                                     8. cri wp 893-17.doc


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

                              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 893 OF 2017


            Sharmin Manish Dham                                            .. Petitioner

                                  Versus
            The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                                .. Respondents

                                                   ...................
            Appearances
            Mr. Daulat G. Khamkar Advocate for the Petitioner
            Mr. H.J. Dedia        APP for the State
                                                    ...................



                              CORAM        : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                               M.S. KARNIK, JJ.
                              DATE         :   APRIL 18, 2017.


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

1. Rule. By consent of the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the matter is heard finally.

2. The case of the petitioner is that she is undergoing life imprisonment and she has completed 14 years of actual imprisonment. Her prayer is that the respondents be directed to decide her case expeditiously for premature release as per the guidelines of the State Government.

            jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                                     1 of 2


                   ::: Uploaded on - 19/04/2017                           ::: Downloaded on - 20/04/2017 00:52:28 :::
                                                               8. cri wp 893-17.doc




3. Learned APP, on instructions, states that the case of the petitioner has been categorized and she has been placed in Category 2(c) of 2010 Guidelines. Learned APP has tendered the documents in relation thereto. The said documents are taken on record and marked "X colly" for identification. In this view of the matter, nothing further survives in this petition, hence, rule is discharged.





[ M.S. KARNIK, J. ]                   [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]




jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                          2 of 2


       ::: Uploaded on - 19/04/2017                ::: Downloaded on - 20/04/2017 00:52:28 :::