STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. GULAM RASOOL DAWOOD MALVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith with consent of the learned Counsel for respondents Nos. 1, 3, and 4. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 is absent. Counsel for the respondents waive service.

(2.) BY this Application, the State of Maharashtra has impugned the Order dated 20th November, 1996, passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 2nd Court, Mazgaon, Bombay, in Case No. 95/p/96 allowing the application preferred by the respondents praying therein that the case may not be committed to the Court of Sessions as no offence under section 307 I. P. C. is made out.

(3.) I have heard Mr. I. S. Thakur for the State of Maharashtra and Mr. A. P. Mundargi for Respondents Nos. 1, 3 and 4. Mr. Gulam Rasool, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 is absent.