Bombay High Court
WPCR/31/2002 of SHRI ANTHONY QUADROS, PONDA-GOA. Vs STATE OF GOA AND ORS., on 28 November 2002
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 31 OF 2002. Shri Anthony Quadros, s/o Rosario Quadros, resident of H.No.241, Near K.T.C. Bus Stand, Shahpur, Ponda, Goa. ... Peetitioner. VERSUS 1. State of Goa:- (i) The Deputy Collector and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, at Margao, Salcete, Goa.
CRIMINALWRIT PETITION NO. 31 OF 2002.
Shri Anthony Quadros,
s/o Rosario Quadros,
resident of H.No.241,
Near K.T.C. Bus Stand, Shahpur,
Ponda, Goa.
...Peetitioner.VERSUS
1. State of Goa:-
(i) The Deputy Collector
and Sub-Divisional Magistrate,at Margao, Salcete, Goa.Maina, Curtorim PoliceStation, Margao, Goa.
(ii) The Inspector of Police,
2. Shri Joao Manuel D’Souza,
resident of Nuvem, Salcete, Goa.
3. Smt. Florina Costa,
resident of Nuvem, Salcete, Goa.
4. Shri Augusto D’Souza,
resident of Goundi, Nuvem,
Salcete, Goa.
5. Shri Vincent D’Souza,
resident of Goundi, Nuvem,
Salcete, Goa.
6. Shri Xavier D’Souza,
resident of Goundi, Nuvem,
Salcete, Goa.
...Respondents.
Mr. Vallabh Pangam, Advocate for the Petitioner under Legal Aid Scheme.
Mr. A.P. Lawande, Public Prosecutor for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. Rohit Bras de Sa, Advocate for the Respondents No.2 to 6.
CORAM: P. V. KAKADE. J.DATE: 28th NOVEMBER, 2002.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT:
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Respondents No.2 to 6. Also heard the learned P.P.
for the Respondent No.1.
3. The only submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the proceeding which is pending under the provisions of Section 145
of Cr.P.C. before the concerned authority should be expedited. In fact, in the petition the prayer is made to issue directions to pass an order under Section 200 Cr.P.C. to appoint a Receiver of the property in the suit and for further direction to file F.I.R. for the alleged impugned offence.
However, since the proceeding under Section 145
Cr.P.C. is pending, it would not be proper to issue directions as prayed for in the petition itself.
4. Hence by consent of the parties, it is hereby directed that the said competent authority shall hear and adjudicate the proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C. pending before it expeditiously and dispose it off according to law as early as possible.
5. With these directions the petition
stands disposed of.
sl.
P.V. KAKADE, J.