Research › Search › Judgment
Bombay High Court · body
2025 DAILYLAW 62628 (BOM)
HARIRAM S/O CHOTHMAL SARAF v. PRASHANTKUMAR S/O PURUSHOTTAM SARAF AND ANOTHER
APEAL/364/2014 · 2025-12-10
Shri M M Nerlikar
Criminal Appealbody2025
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 62628 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 62628 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 42 apeal 364.14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 364/2014 (Hariram S/o Chothmal Saraf Vs. Prashantkumar S/o Purushottam Saraf & anr.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S.A. Mota, Advocate for appellant. Mr. H. D. Futane, APP for respondent No.2.
CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR,
J .
DATED : 10/12/2025. Heard.
2. In the present appeal, on 01.03.2022, this Court passed an order “Appeal against the respondent No.1 is abated.” It appears that respondent No.2 is a State of Maharashtra who is a formal party.
3. Considering the order dated 01.03.2022, nothing survives in the present appeal, hence the same is disposed of accordingly.
( M. M. NERLIKAR
, J.)
Gohane