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

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J
Raju Shantaram Kakphale – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Satyavrat Joshi
For the Respondents: Ms. Veera Shinde

2. Mr. Tapan, complainant in this case, was prosecuted and tried in Criminal Case No. 3629/2004. He was acquitted by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class on 31st January, 2008. After pronouncing the judgment in the open Court on 31st January, 2008, complainant applied for certified copies, on the same day, vide Application No. 161/2008 dated 31st January, 2008. The complainant paid copying charges and copies were to be delivered/supplied on 4th February, 2008.

3. It is unfolded in the evidence that, though the judgment was delivered in the open Court on 31st January, 2008, Pradeep Narvekar, stenographer typed the judgment on 3rd February, 2008.

4. Complainant deposed, after applying for the certified copies on 31st January, 2008, accused who was working as Peon in Court Room No.8 demanded Rs.2,000/- from him for supplying the certified copies of the judgment urgently and asked the complainant to bring money on the next day. When he met the complainant on 01st February, 2008, he alleged the accused repeated the demand and he paid Rs.300/- to him. At that time, accused told him that unless full sum demanded is not paid, he would not receive copies of the judgment and may have to

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