Ramu Garib Sahani vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 4801 Bom

                                                                        3b. cri appeals 1146-14 & 3.doc


RMA      
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION




                                                                                                
                      CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1146 OF 2014
                                       WITH
                    CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 2918 OF 2016




                                                                        
                                       WITH
                    CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 2919 OF 2016
                                       WITH
                    CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 2920 OF 2016




                                                                       
            Ramu Garib Sahani                                            .. Petitioner




                                                            
                                 Versus
            The State of Maharashtra
                                               ig                        .. Respondent

                                                  ...................
                                             
            Appearances
            Ms. Rohini Dandekar Advocate (appointed) for the Petitioner
            Ms. V.S. Mhaispurkar APP for the State
                                     ...................
              
           



                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

DATE : AUGUST 22, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :

1. Heard both sides.

2. Rule. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith.

3. These petitions have been preferred through jail by the

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 2

3b. cri appeals 1146-14 & 3.doc

same petitioner. In all these petitions, the petitioner has

prayed that he be released from prison.

4. Learned APP, on instructions, states that the petitioner

has completed his period of imprisonment and he has been

released from prison. In this view of the matter, nothing

survives in these petitions, hence, rule is discharged.

                                    
                                   
    [ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ]                 [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
      
   






    jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                               2 of 2