The State Of Mah v. Vinod Venkatrao Mahalkar And ORS

(1) Cri. Appln. No. 1519 of 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

Criminal Application No. 1519 of 2006 District : Nanded The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station, Bhagyanagar, Nanded, Through P.I. Special Team Investigation Officer, .. Applicant Shri R.D. Bhurewar.

(Original complainant) versus Vinod s/o. Venkatrao Mahalkar .. Respondents & 7 others.

(Original accused) ............

Mr. K.N. Lokhande, Addl. Public Prosecutor, for the applicant.

Mr. V.D. Sonawane & Mr. C.S. Kulkarni, Advocates, for respondent nos.1, 5, 6 & 7 (Absent).

Mr. S.N. Lovekar, Advocate, for respondent no.2 (Absent).

Mr. U.B. Bilolikar & Mr. A.S. Gandhi, Advocates, for respondent no.4 (Absent).

Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate, for respondent no.8. ............

CORAM : Z.A. HAQ, J.

DATE : 22ND NOVEMBER 2016 ORAL ORDER:

Heard Mr. K.N. Lokhande, learned Addl.

(2) Cri. Appln. No. 1519 of 2006 Public Prosecutor for the applicant - State of Maharashtra and Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, learned Advocate for respondent no.8.

02.

The Magistrate refused to extend P.C.R.

beyond 13th April 2006. This order was challenged before Sessions Court in revision which is dismissed. 03.

The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor states that he has received communication dated 22nd November 2016 from Bhagyanagar Police Station which shows that the charge-sheet is filed and trial is pending.

04.

In view of the facts of the case, the challenge in the petition does not survive because of lapse of time and subsequent events. The Application is dismissed as infructuous. In the circumstances, parties to bear their own costs.

( Z.A. HAQ ) JUDGE ..........

puranik / CRIAPPLN1519.06