High Court of Bombay Examines Criminal Revision Application by Medical Practitioners. The Case Involves Interpretation of Legal Provisions in Criminal Procedure and Substantive Law.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 6
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The High Court of Bombay considered Criminal Revision Application No. 150 of 2019 filed by Dr. Suhas Sampat Jadhav and Dr. Ashwini Suhas Jadhav, medical practitioners, against the State of Maharashtra. The matter involved interpretation of legal provisions. The Court reserved its order on 7 May 2025 and pronounced the judgment on 9 June 2025. Due to the limited text provided, the full facts, legal issues, arguments, and decision are not available.

Issue of Consideration

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.150 OF 2019

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (06) 67

Criminal Revision Application No. 150 of 2019

2025-06-09

S.M. Modak, J.

2025:BHC-AS:22712

Manoj Mohite, Vishwanath Talkute for Applicants; Dr. Birendra Saraf, Avinash Kamkhedkar, Sangita Phad for Respondent State

Dr. Suhas Sampat Jadhav and Dr. Ashwini Suhas Jadhav

The State of Maharashtra (At the instance of Sangola Police Station)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal revision application by original accused (medical practitioners) against State of Maharashtra

Remedy Sought

Challenging the order of the lower court (details not mentioned)

Judgment Excerpts

The very moot question about “interpretation of the” ...

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Arrest Under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Due to Compliance with Statutory Safeguards and Limited Scope of Judicial Review. Arrest Upheld as Enforcement Directorate Provided Written Grounds and Re...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay Examines Criminal Revision Application by Medical Practitioners. The Case Involves Interpretation of Legal Provisions in Criminal Procedure and Substantive Law.