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

2017 Supreme(Bom) 377

A.M.BADAR
Gurunath Laxman Gawli – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicants :Mr. Aditya Gore, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP., Mr. Sandeep Singh, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Petitioners Gurunath Gawli and Sangita Gawli who are accused in Crime No.455 of 2014 registered with Police Station, Mulund at the instance of Sunita Bomble, (widow of the deceased Umesh Bomble) for offences punishable under Sections 306, 323, 504, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of IPC and under Section 32B and 33 of the Bombay Money Lenders Act, by this application are challenging the order dated 21.11.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay thereby rejecting their application for discharge in Sessions Case No.680 of 2015 and 278 of 2016 so far as offences punishable under Sections 306, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and under Section 33 of the Bombay Money Lenders Act, (presently Maharashtra Money Lenders Act) are concerned.

2. Heard the learned advocate for revision petitioners/accused. By taking me extensively through the entire charge-sheet and particularly, through the FIR lodged by Sunita Bomble and statements of witnesses such as Nagesh Bomble, Sanjay Patel, Datta and Shailendra Rokde, the learned Advocate argued that there are several deficiencies in statements of prosecution witnesses and it appears that loop holes are being
























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