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

2020 Supreme(SC) 811

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, K.M.JOSEPH
Neelam Manmohan Attavar – Appellant
Versus
Manmohan Attavar (D) Thr LRs – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Respondent: Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR

ORDER :

1. The petitioner instituted a writ petition1 under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to challenge a judgment dated 31 July 2018 delivered by a Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka in the exercise of the criminal revisional jurisdiction. The relief which was sought in the writ petition was that the judgment of a Single Judge of the High Court dated 31 July 2018 in Criminal Revision Petition 282 of 2018 “may be declared void/disabled/ recalled”. For convenience of reference, the prayers in the writ petition are extracted below:

    “1. The Writ may be permitted.”

    2. Judgment dt 31.7.2018 passed in Crl RP 282/2018 may be declared void/disabled/recalled to protect rights and secure probity in public life.

    3. De novo/Fresh – Free hearing may be recommended before a higher/full Bench.”

1. Writ Petition 44237 of 2018

2. The writ petition before the High Court has been transferred to this Court on 13 December 2019 under Article 139A of the Constitution in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No 342 of 2019. The order of transfer reads thus:

    “Having heard the petitioner-in-person and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and gone through this transfer petition filed

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