SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(SC) 271

K.T.THOMAS, R.P.SETHI
Seeta Hemchandra Shashittal: Niranjan Hemchandra Shashittal: Anuradha Niranjan Shashittal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Thomas, J.-Leave granted.

2. Two lady octogenarians feel that there is not much time ahead of them to complete a trial which is yet to begin, and counting the number of years which the investigation consumed for finalising the charge-sheet, the trial would not be anything less than a long drawn out one. The two ladies approached the High Court of Bombay, along with their kinsfolk, who too are arrayed in the same case, one of them as the kingpin, to get the criminal case axed down at the threshold of the trial stage, mainly on the ground of long delay in completing the investigation. But the High Court, instead of snipping down the case charge-sheeted, dismissed the writ petition solely on the ground that in a similar case the High court refused to countenance similar contention.

3. The facts, barely necessary for disposal of these appeals, can be stated thus: Appellant Niranjan Hemchandra Shashittal is a Government servant who attained the rank of Deputy Commissioner in the Department of Prohibition and Excise of the Maharashtra Government (he will hereinafter be referred to as the appellant-public servant ). Appellant Seeta Hemchandra Shashittal who is now aged 83, and S



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top