Sippy Nirmal Patawari (Intervener) v. The State Of Maharashtra

appw355 ssp FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.355 OF 2014 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2272 OF 2014 Office Notes, Office Memorandam of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Ms Manjula Rao for the petitioner Ms Poonam Utekar for the Applicant Mr.K.V.Saste, APP for the State.

CORAM :A.S.OKA AND R.D.DHANUKA,JJ.

DATE : SEPTEMBER 8, 2016 P.C.

The name of the second respondent is deleted as he is no more.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant-intervenor and the learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Though the applicant may not be the first informant in the FIR subject matter of challenge in the writ petition, it can be said that the applicant is a victim of the alleged offence.

Accordingly, the applicant is a proper party to the main writ petition.

Hence, we dispose of the application by

appw355 passing the following order:

(I) We direct the writ petitioner to implead the applicant as party respondent No.2 to the main writ petition by carrying out amendment within a period of two weeks from the date on which this order is uploaded;

(II) The Advocate for the applicant takes notice of the writ petition;

(III) We clarify that we have made no final adjudication on the correctness of the detailed averments made in this application;

(IV) Criminal application is disposed of on above terms.

(R.D.DHANUKA,J) (A.S.OKA,J.)