A.M.KHANWILKAR, ROHIT ARYA
State of M. P. – Appellant
Versus
Manoj Kumar Uike – Respondent
M.Cr.C. No. 3897/2015
1. At the request of counsel for the State, we defer the hearing of this application till tomorrow as he would like to take clear instructions whether prima facie finding recorded by the Trial Court in order dated 24.6.2014 regarding the age of the respondent is acceptable to the prosecution or otherwise.
M.Cr.C. No. 3848/2015
2. The respondent is not present in Court, though assurance was given in that behalf yesterday.
3. By way of indulgence, list tomorrow (10.4.2015) along with companion cases.
M.Cr.C. No. 3896/2015
4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the respondents that respondent No. 1 is already in jail in connection with another crime of the same type.
5. As regards respondent No. 2, he is presently busy with Second Semester M.B.B.S. examination and for which reason, he is not in a position to remain present in Court, though assurance was given in that behalf yesterday.
6. Since the respondent No. 2 will be busy with written examination till 17.4.2015, we defer the hearing of this application till 20.4.2015.
7. We place on record that instead of respondent No. 2, his father is present in Court to assist the Advocate.
M.Cr.C. No. 4129/2015
8.
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.