Simeen Naeem Chougle v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

apl.248.16.35.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 248 OF 2016 Simeen Naeem Chougle ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...Respondents

Ms. C. Bocarro I/b Mr. Vivek Sharma for the Applicant Ms. P. P. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1-State Mr. Mubin Solkar for the Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

TUESDAY, 27 th SEPTEMBER, 2016 P.C. :

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

Learned Counsel for the applicant does not press this petition. She states that the applicant will file an additional affidavit along with all necessary supporting documents before the trial Court. 3.

Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 to 7 states that if such an additional affidavit with documents is filed, the respondents be permitted to file their reply to the said additional affidavit. SQ Pathan 1/2

apl.248.16.35.doc 4.

Accordingly, the application is disposed of as not pressed. Liberty is granted to the applicant to file an additional affidavit alongwith all necessary documents before the trial Court. 5.

Needless to state that if an additional affidavit with documents is filed before the trial Court, respondents be given an opportunity to deal with the said affidavit/documents.

6.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

SQ Pathan 2/2