Gujarat High Court High Court

Hathibhai vs Jitubhai on 28 October, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Hathibhai vs Jitubhai on 28 October, 2010
Author: Jayant Patel,&Nbsp;Honourable H.B.Antani,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.RA/358/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
REVISION APPLICATION No. 358 of 2010
 

With


 

CRIMINAL
REVISION APPLICATION No. 359 of 2010
 

With


 

CRIMINAL
REVISION APPLICATION No. 360 of 2010
 

=========================================================

 

HATHIBHAI
NAGJIBHAI PATEL - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

JITUBHAI
GEMARBHAI PATEL & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
DEVANG J JOSHI FOR MR PR NANAVATI
for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR IH SYED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. 
MR KP
RAVAL APP IN CR.RA NOS.358 & 359 OF 2010                         
  MR LR PUJARI APP IN CR.RA NO.360 OF 2010 for Respondent(s) :
3, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
		
	

 

Date
: 28/10/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)

1. All
the Criminal Revision Applications are preferred by the original
complainant against the judgment and order passed by the learned
Sessions Judge in the respective Sessions Cases whereby, some accused
have been acquitted for the offence under Sections 302, 330, 506(2),
120B, 201, 323 and 366 of I.P.C.

2. Upon
hearing learned advocate Mr.Devang J. Joshi for Mr.Premal Nanavati
and learned A.P.P. Mr.Pujari as well as Mr.Raval in the respective
revisions, it appears that the State has already preferred common
appeal against the judgment and order of the
learned Sessions Judge for acquittal being Criminal Appeal No.899 of
2010 and the said appeal has been admitted on 18.08.2010 by this
Court.

3. In
above view of the matter, it is not necessary to entertain the
revisions preferred by the original complainant and the only
observation deserves to be made is that the original complainant
shall be at liberty to assist the Public Prosecutor at the time of
final hearing of the appeal preferred by the State. Hence, all the
Revision Applications are disposed of.

4. Office
to show the name of Mr.Premal Nanavati with Public Prosecutor in
Criminal Appeal No.899 of 2010.

(JAYANT
PATEL, J.)

(H.B.ANTANI,
J.)

Hitesh

   

Top