KISHORE SHANKAR SIGNAPURKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRIMINAL Writ Petition No.303 of 1997, Criminal Application No.1150 of 1997, Criminal Writ Petition No.629 of 1997, Criminal Application No.1182 of 1997 and Criminal Writ Petition No.630 of 1997 were admitted and referred to Division Bench in pursuance to the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court. Criminal Writ Petition No.544 of 1997, Criminal Writ Petition No.719 of 1997, Criminal Application No.723 of 1997 and Criminal Writ Petition No.690 of 1997, though not admitted, were kept for hearing along with these petitions. Accordingly, in Criminal Writ Petition No.544 of 1997, rule is issued and Mr.Namjoshi, learned Special Public Prosecutor, waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State and the prosecution. Similarly, in Criminal Writ Petition No.719 of 1997, rule is issued and Mr.Namjoshi, learned Special Public Prosecutor, waives service of rule on behalf of the State and the prosecution. In Criminal Application No.723 of 1997, rule is issued and Mr.Namjoshi for the respondent no.1 and Mr.Menon for the respondent no.2 waive service of rule. In Criminal Writ Petition No.690 of 1997, rule is issued and Mr.Namjoshi for the respondent no.1 and Mr.Menon for the respondent nos.2 and 3, waive service of rule. By consent, rule in these petitions is heard forthwith.

(2.) ALL these petitions raise a common point regarding the interpretation and scope of section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) WE have heard Mr.Nitin Pradhan, Mr.Manohar, Mr.Ponda, Mr.Shivade, Mr.Majeed Memon, Mr.Chotalia, Mr.Mirza, Mr.Sawant and Mr.Mundargi for different petitioners and we have also heard Mr.Namjoshi, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr.Hakani, the learned Advocate appearing for intervenors in Criminal Writ Petition No.303 of 1997, Criminal Application No 1159 of 1997 and Criminal Application No.1182 of 1997.