ABHAY M.THIPSAY
Sumitra Hiralal Saklikar – Appellant
Versus
Hemant Radhakrishna Sapale – Respondent
1. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.
2. Respondents waive service.
3. By consent, heard finally forthwith.
4. The petitioners are the accused nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No. 13911/SS/2009 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 65th Court at Andheri. The said case arises on a complaint filed by the respondent no.1 herein (hereinafter referred to as ‘the complainant’ for the sake of clarity and convenience).
5. Including the petitioners, totally six persons were mentioned as the accused, in the complaint, but after examining the complainant on oath as contemplated u/s.200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the learned Magistrate issued process only against five of them, i.e. the petitioners and three others. The allegation against the petitioners and other accused is in respect of offences punishable under section 447 IPC, 504 IPC read with section 34 of the IPC. Aggrieved by the order issuing process against them, the petitioners approached the Court of Sessions by filing an application for revision. A number of objections to the order issuing process as passed by the learned Magistrate were taken, but the learned Addl. Sessions Judge who heard the revis
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.