Rajesh S/O Dhannalal Daware And Another vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps, ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 38 Bom

Bombay High Court

Rajesh S/O Dhannalal Daware And Another vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps, ... on 2 January, 2024

Author: Vinay Joshi

Bench: Vinay Joshi

Order                                                                                        0201wp433.22
                                                   1


                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.


                        CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 433/2022.
                                        Rajesh Dhannalal Daware
                                               -VERSUS-
                                        The State of Maharashtra.

Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders                         Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.


                                        Shri R.D. Hajare, Advocate [Appointed] for the Petitioner.
                                        Shri S.S. Doifode, A.P.P. for the Respondent.



                                             CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND
                                                     VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

                                             DATE        : JANUARY 02, 2024.



                                                       Heard.

2. The petitioner has been sentenced to

suffer life imprisonment for the offence punishable

under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is

informed that the judgment and order of

conviction has been maintained upto the Supreme

Court. The petitioner is serving the sentence in

Nagpur Central Prison.

3. The urge of petitioner is that his mobile

phone having number 9326201236 has been

Rgd.

Order 0201wp433.22

seized during the course of investigation. He seeks

a direction to provide CDR of said mobile from

01.09.2014 onwards.

4. The petition is bereft of any reason as

to why such CDR is required. Moreover, a

procedure has been laid down under which CDR

can be made available to a consumer or any special

authorised agency. Since we could not see any

substantial reason for invoking writ jurisdiction,

the petition is dismissed being devoid of merits.

5. Fees of the Advocate appointed for the

petitioner be paid as per Rules.

JUDGE JUDGE

Signed by: R.G. Dhuriya (RGD) Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 02/01/2024 17:28:21 Rgd.