Raghunath Anant Govilkar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
judgment
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —
1.Leave granted.
2.The challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by the learned Single Judge of the Mumbai High Court dismissing the Criminal Writ Petition filed by the appellant for quashing the proceedings pending before the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, Eaplanade. The appellant was the accused No.10 in the said case. The allegation against the appellant was that while working with Maharashthon Housing and Area Development Authority (in short ‘MHADA’) the appellant allotted premises to various persons under his signature, issued rent receipts so that the said persons could claim that they were in possession of the tenements, though in fact, the tenements, in question, were vacant and were not in possession of MHADA.
3.According to the prosecution, the appellant committed offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1986 (in short ‘IPC’). Before the Trial Court, the appellant filed an application for discharge in terms of Section 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the ‘Cr.P.C.’) primarily on the ground that sanction was necessary for his prosecution. It was al
Harihar Prasad v. State of Bihar
P. Arulswami v. State of Madras
State of Kerala v. V. Padmanabhnan Nair
Kalicharan Mahapatra v. State of Orissa
State of Orissa v. Ganesh Chandra Jew
Srreekantiah Ranatta Munnipslli v. State of Bombay
Bakhshish Singh Brar v. Gurmej Kaur
R. Balakrishna Pillai v. State of Kerala (1996)1 SCC 478 – Relied upon.[Para 25]
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.