Anil Kumar Gaurihar Nawale v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

22.wp824.15.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 824 OF 2015 Anil Kumar Gaurihar Nawale.

...Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & anr.

...Respondents.

Mr. M.S. Mohite i/b. Mr. Anant Wadgaonkar, advocate for petitioner.

Mr. K.V. Saste, APP for State.

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : NOVEMBER 8, 2019.

P.C.:

Heard for some time. Learned APP has invited our attention to the fact that trap was successful and as such at this stage, Court should not intervene in extraordinary jurisdiction. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, trap was against a person arraigned as co-accused and relationship between the petitioner and that person in so far as alleged transaction is concerned, has not been established. Contention is the tender process in relation to which the complainant had filed dummy tender, was practically over leaving no scope for any negotiation or demands. Talwalkar

22.wp824.15.doc Material on record shows that after receipt of complaint, there is some CDR and trap. Amount of Rs. 15,000/- was paid to person who has been alleged to be co-accused. Trap was on 3/12/2012 and present petition has been filed on 20/2/2015. It is without any orders of this court since then.

We therefore, are not inclined to intervene in extraordinary jurisdiction. We keep all the contention of the petitioner open and with liberty to petitioner to raise it before appropriate forum dispose of present petition. (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J) (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J) Talwalkar