1. Sayanna Gangaram Battin (Goud) v. The State Of Maharashtra.

642.16WP FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | ______________________________________________________ CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 642 OF 2016 SAYANNA GANGARAM BATTIN (GOUD)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.H.I. Pathan APP for Respondent/State : Mr.S.W. Munde ...

CORAM: S.S.SHINDE & SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

Dated: August 25, 2016 ...

This Petition is filed seeking directions to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge-1, Nanded to decide and dispose of the pending Special (ACB) Case No.7/2001 before it within two months.

2.

We carefully perused the report received from the Ad-hoc District Judge-1 & Assistant Sessions Judge, Nanded. It appears that the petitioner himself has filed application at Exhibit-217 for issuance of summons to the witnesses,

642.16WP namely (i) Lalu Ramji Rathod, (ii)Shankar Laxminarayan Sangu, (iii) B.S. Gadekar and (iv) Manik Shivram Perke, and therefore, the concerned Court has issued summons to those witnesses. Now the case is posted for hearing on 7th July, 2016.

In the said report, it is stated that the concerned Judge would make every endeavour to dispose of the case at the earliest.

3.

Since the petitioner himself has filed the application for issuance of summons to the aforementioned witnesses, the petitioner cannot seek directions to expedite the hearing and dispose of the case within two months. Such prayer is unreasonable.

4.

In view of the assurance given by the concerned Judge to dispose of the said case at the earliest, he shall ensure the disposal of the said pending case. Hence no orders are necessary. The Petition stands disposed of.

(SANGITRAO S. PATIL,J) (S.S. SHINDE,J) sga/