SUSHAMA ARUN PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

(3.) Even though learned Counsel for Respondent No.6 has sought time to file reply on the ground that the Petitioner has filed some rejoinder, we do not think that there is any need for granting further time to Respondent No.6 for giving response to the averments made in the rejoinder for the reason that now, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner has categorically stated that the Petitioner does not rely upon the statements made in the rejoinder. The prayer of learned Counsel for Respondent No.6 is, therefore, rejected.