Shri Gautam Kanchanpurkar, Prasad Panchal (R.No.2)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2853 OF 2010 Suresh Sitaram Dolas ...Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. &..Respondents ----- Ms.A.Ashtivhar i/b. Mr.R. Sathyanarayanan for Applicant Mrs.R.V. Newton -APP for State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 1ST JULY, 2010 P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submits that after the complaint was dismissed by the Learned Magistrate by his order dated 6.11.2006, the Learned Magistrate has thereafter passed a second order in the said complaint referring the matter for enquiry under section 202 of the Cr.P.C. to the Byculla Police Station. It is submitted that the complaint having been dismissed, a subsequent order in the same complaint could not have been passed by the Learned Magistrate. In my view, prima facie case is made out for grant of ad-interim relief. Issue notice to the Respondent No.2, returnable after four weeks. In the meantime, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b). (V.M. KANADE J.)

Order - Status 20: 1 Cri-A-2853-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2853 OF 2010 Suresh Sitaram Dolas ... Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. R.Sathyanarayanan, Advocate, for the applicant Ms. M.R.Tidke,Advocate for the respondent No.1 - State. Mr. R.A.Shelke, i/b. Shri Gautam Kanchanpurkar, Advocate, for respondent No.2. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 29th April, 2011. P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Perused both the orders passed by the Magistrate. By first order dated 6.11.2006, he had rejected the complaint as premature with liberty to the complainant to file fresh complaint as and when cause of action arose. However, by second order dated 17.2.2007, he allowed the same old complaint to be revived and issued the process. The second order is challenged in the present application. After some discussion, with consent of the learned Counsel, the order dated 17.2.2007 is hereby set aside with liberty to the respondent No.2 Mhi 2 Cri-A-2853-10.sxw complainant to file fresh complaint, if he so desires. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)