The State Of Maharashtra v. Mohd Giyasuddin S/O Sk Ibrahim And Another

G.A.Ghule [P.A.] 1/2 wp 1201.14 (Sr.No.5).sxw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

Criminal Writ Petition No. 1201 Of 2014.

THE STATE Of MAHARASHTRA.

VERSUS

MOHD GIYASUDDIN S/O SK IBRAHIM AND ANOTHER.

Appearance => Mr. V.D. Godbharle, Addl.Public Prosecutor, for the State of Maha. Mr. Mahesh Ghatge, Advocate for Resp.Nos. 1 and 2.

CORAM

:

V.M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATE :

9th JANUARY, 2015.

Per Court :- Heard Mr. Godbharle, learned Addl.P.P., who has vehemently submitted that order impugned order cannot be sustained in the eye of law. [2] The prosecution was launched against the respondents in CR No.325/13 registered with the Police Station, Nanded (Rural) for the offences punishable under Sections 328, 188, 272 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 26 (2) (iv) read with Section 30 (2) (a) and Section 59(iv) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. [3] Application for grant of Police Custody Remand was rejected by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.III, Nanded on 16th October, 2013. The State has filed Criminal Revision Application No.113 Of 2013 challenging the order passed by the learned Magistrate, dated 16th October, 2013 by which the P.C.R. was rejected.

2/2 wp 1201.14 (Sr.No.5).sxw [4] The learned Sessions Judge, Nanded on 31st October, 2013 found that State has failed to make out any case for P.C.R. And, therefore, dismissed the Cri.Revn.Application.

[5] After hearing Mr. V.D. Godbharle, learned Addl.Public Prosecutor, for the State of Maha. and Mr. Mahesh Ghatge, learned counsel for Resp.Nos. 1 and 2. With their able assistance, I have gone through the contents of the impugned order. I see no reason to interfere with the well reasoned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge. Hence, Writ Petition is rejected.

(V.M. DESHPANDE, J.)