Vinay Mishra v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

(5) wp-3645.16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3645 OF 2016 Mr. Vinay Mushra : Petitioner.

Versus

State of Maharashtra and anr.

: Respondents.

Ms. Sadhna Kumar for the Petitioner.

Mrs. M M Deshmukh, Addl. PP for the Respondent/State. CORAM :

R. M. SAVANT & SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ.

DATE :

27th APRIL 2018 P.C.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mrs. M M Deshmukh, in so far as prayer clause (1) of the above Writ Petition is concerned, states that the police have conducted an enquiry and the decision which has been arrived at by the police on such enquiry would be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from date. Statement accepted. In so far as prayer clause (2) is concerned, the said prayer seeks police protection for the Petitioner. The order rejecting the application for police protection has not been annexed to the above Writ Petition. It is therefore not possible for us to consider the said prayer in the absence of the order being annexed to the above Writ Petition. It would therefore be open for the Petitioner to file independent proceedings to challenge the said order rejecting the application of the Petitioner for police protection. lgc

(5) wp-3645.16 In so far as prayer clause (3) is concerned, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on instructions states that the police intend to file "A" summary report in the Trial Court. In view thereof, it is not necessary to consider the said prayer for transfer of investigation. It would be open for the Petitioner to take appropriate recourse in the Trial Court against the "A" summary report that would be filed in the Trial Court. In view of above, the above Writ Petition to accordingly stand disposed of.

[SARANG V. KOTWAL, J] [R.M.SAVANT, J] lgc