All Writ Petition (Civil)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BEFORE THE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur $V/s.$ The Deputy Collector & Ors. ...Petitioner ....Respondent Mr. Nitin Padmakar Deshpande – Adv. for the Petitioner. Mr. B. V. Samant, AGP for State. Uttam R. Patil – DRO Pune. CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. D. S. DESHMUKH, REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL-II) V. A. SATHE, DY. REGISTRAR, OSD AT CPC DATE : $11^{text{th}}$ DECEMBER, 2021 $overline{P}C$ .: Remove from board. $1.$ Place the matter before Regular Court. $2.$ (V. A. SATHE) (D. S. DESHMUKH) (S. M. MODAK, J.) O.S.D. at CPC Registrar (Judl.-II) (Judge)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur ...Petitioner V/s. The Deputy Collector Resettlement Pune District Pune and Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Nitin P. Deshpande, for the Petitioner. Mr. R. S. Pawar, A.G.P. for the Respondent / State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ. DATE : 09 JUNE 2022 P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner. Issue notice to the Respondents returnable on 30 June 2022. Learned A.G.P. waives notice for all the Respondents. (SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur PETITIONER V/S The Deputy Collector And Ors RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. G. SEWLIKAR, JJ DATE : 30th June, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 12/08/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: UMESH SHRINIWAS MALANI Digitally signed by UMESH SHRINIWAS MALANI Date: 2022.08.20 13:31:24 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 *** *** Ankush Bapurao Thakur ...Petitioner Versus The Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation) Pune & Ors. ...Respondents None for the petitioner. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & KISHORE C. SANT, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 12, 2022. P. C. : Matter is moved before this Court by way of a praceipe. In view of urgency, order is passed on praceipe itself. None for the petitioner. List the petition as per its own turn. (KISHORE C. SANT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

Order - Status 12: SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI Digitally signed by SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI Date: 2022.08.26 16:53:33 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur ...Petitioner Versus The Deputy Collector (Resettlement) Pune, & Ors. ...Respondents *** Ms. Rachana Harpale i/by Mr. Nitin P. Deshpande, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. V. S. Gokhale, B Panel Counsel (AGP), for the Respondent State. *** CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & KISHORE C. SANT, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 25, 2022. P. C. : Matter is moved before this Court by way of a praceipe. In view of urgency, order is passed on praceipe itself. Heard learned Counsel for Petitioner. Issue notice to the Respondents, making the same returnable on 06th October, 2022. Learned AGP waives notice for Respondent – State. Learned Counsel for Petitioner is permitted to serve the private Respondents, by way of any legally permissible mode of service, apart from Court service and to place on record service affidavit before next date. (KISHORE C. SANT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur ...Petitioner Versus The Deputy Collector Resettlement Pune District Pune And Ors. ...Respondents Ms. Kanchan Phatak i/b Mr. Nitin Deshpande, for Petitioner. Mr. V.S. Gokhale, 'B' Panel Counsel for the Respondents-State. ---- CORAM : R.D.DHANUKA, AND M.M.SATHAYE, JJ. DATE : 18th JANUARY 2023 P.C. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service for the Respondent/State. Taken up for final disposal by consent. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to the Respondents-State to delete the entries of 'reservation for project affected persons' from the other rights column of 7/12 extracts of the Petitioner's land admeasuring 2 Hectares and 72 Ares from Gat No. 112, situated at Village Takali Bhima, Taluka Daund, District – Pune. It is the case of the Petitioner that the subject matter land is falling in the benefited zone and as such it is kept under reservation SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Digitally signed by SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Date: 2023.01.19 12:19:47 +0530 vide M. E. No. 505, for the allotment of project affected persons of Bhama-Askhed Irrigation project. It is further case of the Petitioner that because of such endorsement, he cannot deal with his land and Government has also not taken steps in last 24 years for acquisition and allotment of this land to the project affected persons. As a result, there is indefinite fetter/restriction on the Petitioner's right to enjoy subject matter land. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has invited our attention to various earlier orders passed by this Court viz. Order dated 17.09.2013 passed in Writ Petition No. 5207 of 2013, Order dt. 17.10.2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 2821 of 2018, Order dt. 14.08.2019 passed in batch of Writ Petitions with leading Writ Petition No. 5763 of 2017, Order dt. 17.02.2020 passed in Writ Petition No. 1578/2020 1567, 1474, 1475 and 1476 all of 2020, Order dt.27.10.2020 passed in group of Writ Petitions with leading Writ Petition No. 5077 of 2020, Order dt. 05.08.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.2508 of 2021, Order dt. 11.08.2021 passed in Writ Petition No. 8629 of 2018, Order dt. 07.10.2021 passed in Writ Petition No. 1601 of 2021 and Writ Petition No. 716 of 2021, Order dt. 15.11.2021 passed in group of Writ Petitions with leading Writ Petition No. 1332 of 2021 and latest Order dt. 02.03.2022 passed in group of Writ Petitions with leading Writ Petition No. 5507 of 2021. Perusal of all these orders show that this Court has taken consistent view that private lands of the citizens like Petitioner cannot be kept under continuous and indefinite fetter, without initiating any action for allotment to project affected persons. If the Respondent-State wants to allot any of these lands to project affected persons, necessary steps must be taken and completed in time bound manner, otherwise the subject matter land must be released from such endorsements on 7/12 extract. Learned AGP for the Respondent-State could not distinguish facts of the present matter from the facts of the above said cases. We are therefore, of the view that this matter is covered by aforesaid Judgments and Orders taking consistent view. In that view of the matter, we pass the following order : (i) The State Government is directed to complete the process of allotting the Petitioner's land which is declared as part of the benefited zone, for allotment to the project affected persons, if required, and the said process shall be completed within six months from today, without fail. (ii) It is further directed that if the Petitioner's land is not allotted as stated above, the mutation entries effected in its 7/12 extracts about reservation for project affected persons, be deleted without further reference to the Court within two weeks from the date of expiry of six months. It is directed that no further extension of time would be granted for the same. (iii) It is further directed that if the entire process of allotment of Petitioner's land is not over within a period of six months from today as stated above, the Petitioner whose land has been placed under the benefited zone, would be at liberty to deal with his said land in the manner he desires and the State Government shall not initiate any acquisition proceedings in respect of the Petitioner's land which is subject matter of this petition, after expiry of six months. (iv) It is further made clear that the Government Resolution dated 18th January, 2022 and 11th February, 2022 shall be read with this order, so far as its application to the Petitioner's land is concerned. (v) The Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute in above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. (vi) All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order. [M.M.SATHAYE, J.] [R.D.DHANUKA, J.]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6517 OF 2017 Bholanath R. Shukla ...Petitioner vs. The Transport Engineer (Projects) ...Respondent Mr. Ajinkya Patil a/w. Mr. Dharmapal Dave i/b. Naik Patil Salvi & Associates, for the Petitioner. Mr. B.B. Sharma, for RespondentCIDCO. CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & M. S. SONAK, JJ. DATE : JUNE 19, 2017 P.C.: . The learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the Petition with liberty to file a fresh Petition if occasion so arises. With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn. (M. S. SONAK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7887 OF 2024 Vishwas S/o Babasaheb Deshmukh And Ors ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary Social Justice And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ DATE : 4th March, 2025 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 05/03/2025. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7887 OF 2024 Vishwas S/o Babasaheb Deshmukh And Ors ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary Social Justice And Ors ....RESPONDENT Mr. S. R. Barlinge (appeared through VC) a/w Mr. Deepak Pote for Petitioner Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl.G.P. a/w Mr. A.C. Bhadang, AGP for Respondents-State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ DATE : 5th March, 2025 P.C. : S. O. to 06/03/2025 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: TRUPTI SADANAND signed by TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE Date: 2025.03.13 17:38:25 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7887 OF 2024 Vishwas s/o. Babasaheb Deshmukh & Ors. … Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents Mr.Ketan Pote (through VC) h/f. Mr.Deepak Pote for the Petitioners. Mr.P.P.Kakde, Addl.GP with Mr.A.C.Bhadang, AGP for the Respondent -State. Mr.Rajiv More, Law Officer is present. Mr.Prashant Gaikwad, Medical Social Worker is present. CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ. DATE : 6TH MARCH, 2025 P.C. :- The Petitioners have put forth prayer clauses (A), (B) and (C), as under : "A] By a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, or order or directions in the like nature, respondent No. 2 be directed to consider the petitioners for absorption in any other aided School meant for physically challenged students. B] By a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, or order or directions in the like nature, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 may kindly be directed to pay salary of the petitioners for a period from 2017 till the date of their absorption. C] Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, respondent No. 2 be directed to consider the petitioners absorption as per their seniority in the waiting list maintained by respondent No. 2 without waiting for the list to be submitted by respondent No. 4 Management". The learned Addl.GP submits, on instructions, that an Appeal was filed by Respondent No.4 Management, challenging the decision of the Government to close down the said Institution. The said Appeal was allowed on 25th January, 2018. However, thereafter, the Management has not started the said Institution. Therefore, these Petitioners are still in the lurch. We are informed that the proposals of these Petitioners, for absorption, have been forwarded by Respondent No.3 to Respondent No.2. The learned Addl.GP submits that the said proposals could not be acted upon since the department requires the service books along with the appointment orders of these Petitioners and the Institution is closed. If the Petitioners tender self attested copies of the service books along with their appointment orders, Respondent No.2 would consider the same and take a decision as regards the absorption of these Petitioners. He, therefore, prays that the Petitioners should cooperate. The learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits, on instructions, that the Petitioners are willing to cooperate. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed off with the following directions : (a) The Petitioners shall prepare additional copies of their service books along with their appointment orders and tender them to Respondent no. 2; (b) Depending upon the availability of posts on which these Petitioners would be eligible, the appropriate Authority would start issuing orders of absorption of these Petitioners and similarly situated employees who have not approached the Court, strictly as per their seniority list; 3 of 4 (c) Insofar as the payment of salary to a surplus teacher is concerned, in the light of the Government Resolution dated 15th March, 2024, we direct the concerned Authorities to ensure that the said Government Resolution is scrupulously followed and the surplus teachers be paid their due amounts, within a period of 60 days, and to be paid until they are absorbed. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1201 OF 2022 Abdul Aziz Mahammud Sayed Fakih Since Dec Thr His Legal Heirs ....PETITIONER V/S Shripat Kathod Tambde Since Dec Thr Lrs ....RESPONDENT Mr Sanjay S Patil Advocate for Petitioner. { Mentioned at 3.50 p.m. } Ms Kavita N Solunke - AGP for Respondent - State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHRIRAM MADHUSUDAN MODAK, JJ DATE : 22nd February, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 23/02/2022 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1201 OF 2022 Abdul Aziz Mohd.Sayed Fakih, since deceased through His L.Rs. & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Shripat K.Tambde, since deceased through His L.Rs. & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Sanjay S. Patil for the Petitioners. Mr.R.S. Pawar, AGP for the Respondent for the State - Respondent Nos.4 and 5. CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA & S.M. MODAK, JJ. DATE : 23RD FEBRUARY, 2022. P.C. :- Mr.Pawar, learned AGP for the State seeks time to take instructions and to file affidavit in reply. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the land of the petitioners is the subject matter of the impugned award, the compensation is awarded in favour of the respondent nos.1 to 3. Statement is accepted. Issue notice upon the respondent nos.1 to 3, returnable on 6 th April, 2022. Hamdast is permitted. In addition to the Court notice the petitioners are permitted to serve the respondent nos.1 to 3 by private service by all permissible modes of services in accordance with law. Learned AGP waives service for the respondent nos.4 and 5. The respondent nos.4 and 5 shall not release any payment of compensation in favour of the respondent nos.1 to 3 till next date. Place the matter on board for admission on 6th April, 2022. (S.M. MODAK, J.) (R.D. DHANUKA, J.) Digitally signed by VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Date: 2022.02.24 12:13:36 +0530

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1201 OF 2022 Abdul Aziz Mohammud Sayed Fakih Since deceased Through LRs. … Petitioner Versus Shripat Kathod Tambde Since deceased Through LRs. … Respondent Mr. Sanjay S. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. R. S. Pawar, AGP for the Respondents/State. CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA & VINAY JOSHI, JJ. DATED : APRIL 6, 2022 P.C. Await service. Stand over to 4 th May 2022. Interim order passed earlier to continue till then. (VINAY JOSHI, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date: 2022.04.08 15:20:58 +0530

Order - Status 10: 48-wp1201-22.doc vai VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Digitally signed by VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Date: 2022.05.06 15:02:27 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1201 OF 2022 Abdul Mohd.Sy.Fakih, since deceased through his L.Rs. ...Petitioners V/s. Shripat K. Tambde, since deceased through his L.Rs. & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Sanjay Patil for the Petitioners. Mrs.M.S. Bane, AGP for the State - Respondent. CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & M.G. SEWLIKAR, JJ. DATE : 4TH MAY, 2022. P.C. :- Await service. Returnable date is extended to 12th July, Ad-interim order passed by this Court to continue till then. (M.G. SEWLIKAR, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1201 OF 2022 Abdul Aziz Mahammud Sayed Fakih Since Dec Thr His Legal Heirs ....PETITIONER V/S Shripat Kathod Tambde Since Dec Thr Lrs ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. G. SEWLIKAR, JJ DATE : 12th July, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 12/09/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1201 OF 2022 Abdul Aziz Mahammud Sayed Fakih Since Dec Thr His Legal Heirs ....PETITIONER V/S Shripat Kathod Tambde Since Dec Thr Lrs ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN JAMDAR & HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ DATE : 12th September, 2022 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 28/09/2022 In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI Digitally signed by BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI Date: 2022.09.29 14:57:41 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1201 OF 2022 Abdul Aziz Mahammud Sayed Fakih … Petitioner Versus Shripat Kathod Tambde & Ors. … Respondents ****** Mr. Sanjay Patil for the Petitioner. Mr. Prithviraj Gole for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. S. B. Kalel, AGP for the State. ****** CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA & R. N. LADDHA, JJ. DATE : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2022 P.C. :- . The matter is mentioned in the morning. The matter as per the roster would be before the coordinate bench. The coordinate bench is not available. The petitioner seeks continuation of the interim order passed earlier. The learned advocate for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 is present and the learned AGP is also present. At the request of parties, place the matter on 11th October, 2022. Interim order passed earlier shall continue till then. [R. N. LADDHA, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1201 OF 2022 Abdul Azia Mahammud Sayed Fakih (Since deceased through his LRs) Vazir Begam Aziz Mahammud Sayed Fakih (Since deceased through her LRs) 1 Tahera Mahammud Yousuf Hendade and Ors. .. Petitioners Versus Shripat Kathod Tambde (Since deceased through his LRs) 1 Vasant Shripat Tambde and Ors. .. Respondents …... Mr.Sanjay Patil, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr.Sandesh Patil i/b. Mr.Chintan Shaha, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr.R.S. Pawar, AGP for the Respondent – State. …... CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATED : 11 October 2022. RAJESHRI PRAKASH AHER Digitally signed by RAJESHRI PRAKASH AHER Date: 2022.10.15 16:37:07 +0530 P.C. : The learned counsel for Respondents raised a preliminary objection that the Petitioners have an alternate remedy under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013, where the Petitioners can make a reference to the concerned authority. 2 Learned counsel for the Petitioner accepts and states that the Petitioners will approach the concerned authority and prays that the ad–interim order granted in this Petition be continued for some time to enable the Petitioners to approach the concerned authority. Considering the above submissions, and the fact that ad–interim order is operating since February 2022, while we dispose of the Petition, we continue the position under ad–interim order dated 23 February 2022, for a period of four weeks. 3 The contentions of the parties are kept open and continuation of ad–interim order will not be construed as reflection on the merits of the rival contentions. 4 Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. NITIN JAMDAR, J.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1580 OF 2004. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or Judge's orders. orders or directions and Registrar's orders. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Nitin Pradhan for the Petitioner. Ms.M.H.Mhatre, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2-State. CORAM : ABHAY S.OKA, J. DATED : 16th June, 2005. P.C.: Issue notice to the Respondent returnable on 5th August 2005. The learned A.P.P. waives service for Respondent No.2. In addition to service through Court the Advocate for the Petitioner to serve private notice. Judge.

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1580 OF 2004 Nasari Dairy Products Ltd. ...Petitioner vs. Smt.Shobhadevi ...Respondents Shinde & anr. Mr.Prakash Nail for the petitioner Mr.Y.S.Shinde A.P.P. for State None for the Respondent No.1. CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. DATE : JULY 31,2008 P.C.: Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner filed a private complaint in the court of Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Gadhinglaj in which process was issued. The process was issued only for two offences under section 323 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code. In a petition filed by the petitioner, this court has interfered and directed that the process should be issued against the Respondents for other offences under the Companies Act and Indian Penal Code. By order dated 8th July 2002, the learned Magistrate passed an order of discharge by exercising power under sub section 2 of section 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. The order of discharge was passed as the Petitioner failed to appear and adduce evidence. A revision application preferred by the petitioner against the said order was rejected by the learned Magistrate. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was diligently prosecuting the complaint and in fact the petitioner was in a position to adduce evidence. He submitted that if an opportunity is granted, the petitioner is in a position to adduce evidence to substantiate the charges. He, therefore, submitted that by setting aside the impugned order, the complaint be remanded. I have considered the submissions. The order dated 21st July 2000 passed by the learned Magistrate shows that the Petitioner was seeking adjournment. When the complaint appeared on board on 20th June 2002, neither the petitioner nor his Advocate were present. The learned Judge passed an order recording that if on the next date the petitioner failed to lead evidence before charge, necessary order will be passed on the complaint. On 8th July 2002, when the complaint came up before the court, the learned Magistrate noted that no evidence has been adduced by the petitioner. The learned Judge referred to his earlier order passed on an application at Exh.42 in which he had observed that the averments made in the complaint and verification recorded therein was not sufficient to frame the charges in absence of any further evidence adduced by the petitioner. As the evidence was not adduced by the petitioner, the learned Judge proceeded to pass an order of discharge by exercising power under sub section 2 of section 245 of the said Code. I find no reason to 2 - interfere with the said order as well as the order of the Sessions Court by which an order of discharge has been confirmed. The complaint was of the year 1996. After granting sufficient opportunities the petitioner could not adduce the evidence. Considering all the aforesaid factual aspects, now it will be unjust to exercise power under Article 227 of Constitution of India or under section 482 of the said Code to interfere at this stage and to permit the petitioner to adduce the evidence. No case is made out for interference. Hence, petition is rejected. JUDGE

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1538 OF 2004 Kishor @ Lala Chetahmal Lalwani ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mrs.Smita Rajendra Kadu for Petitioner. Mr.A.S.Gadkari, A.P.P. for Respondents. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. OCTOBER 15, 2004. P.C. Heard Counsel for the parties. Perused the record. I find no reason to interfere in exercise of writ jurisdiction in the fact situation of the present case. While rejecting the application for furlough leave made by the Petitioner, the Authority has taken into account, recent recommendations made from appropriate quarters. The material which was gathered during the enquiry revealed that if Petitioner was to be released, he may be a threat to panch and witnesses of the criminal case, who had deposed against him. That reason qualifies the requirement of Rule 4(4) of the The Prisons (Bombay Furlough & Parole) Rules, 1959. It is not open for this Court to impose its views on the subjective satisfaction reached by the Authority on the basis of material gathered during the enquiry while considering the Application preferred by the Petitioner. There are other good reasons mentioned in the reply affidavit filed, which are supported by the recommendations received by the appropriate authority produced before me. To get over this position, learned Counsel contends that out of six grounds, most of the grounds were non-existing grounds. However, that statement does not commend to me. Indeed, the Petitioner may be right in contending that merely because his earlier application was rejected because of adverse report, the same cannot be the basis to reject his subsequent application, which ought to have been considered on its own merits. However, that is not the only reason on the basis of which the present Application has been rejected. For rejecting the present application, fresh report was called for, and the report received clearly spell out apprehension if the Petitioner was to be released. Taking overall view of the matter, no interference is warranted. Dismissed. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 5825 of 2007 ------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Coram,appearances,Court's Orders : Court's or Judges order or directions and Registrar Orders : ------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.Amit Borkar for the petitioner. CORAM : S.B. MHASE & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATED : 10th August 2007. P.C:- . Notice returnable after four weeks. Hamdast allowed. (D.G.KARNIK, J) (S.B.MHASE, J)