All Cases

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICTION NO.1321 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1322 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.995 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.347 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.346 OF 2006 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.1299 OF 2004 Kashinath Ramchandra Mokal and ors. : Applicants. Versus Sudhakar Narayan Mokal and ors. : Respondents. Mr. A S Rameshan for the Applicants. Mr.Pradeep M Patil for the Respondent No.1. CORAM : R M SAVANT, J. DATE : 04th May 2012 P.C. 1 The above Civil Application Nos.1321/08 and 1322/08 have been filed for restoration of the Civil Application Nos.347/06 and 346/06. The Civil Application No.995/05 has been filed for reinstating the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 as party Respondents. The Civil Application No.347/06 has been filed for bringing the heirs of the Respondent No.5 on record who are Respondent Nos.5A to 5E, and the Civil Application No.346/06 has been filed for bringing the heir of the Respondent No.6 on record who is the Respondent No.6A. 2 Though notices were issued in the above Civil Application Nos.347/06 and 346/06, this was possibly in view of the fact that the Court which issued the notice, was oblivious of the fact that in Civil Application No.237 of 2002 which has been filed for condonation of delay of 2 years and 144 days in filing the Appeal, the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants/Appellants had made a statement that he would delete the Respondent Nos.5 and 6. Accordingly the said Respondents were allowed to be deleted at the risk of the Applicants/Appellants. Thereafter the said Civil Applications were heard and the delay of 2 years and 144 days was condoned on the basis of deleting the Respondent Nos.5 and 6. In view of the said deletion of the said Respondent Nos.5 and 6 in the said Civil Application No.237 of 2002, the Civil Application No.995 of 2005 for their reinstatement is misconceived, as also no notice could have been issued in Civil Application Nos.347 of 2006 and 346 of 2006. 3 In view of the situation arising out of the deletion of the Respondent Nos.5 and 6, the learned counsel for the Applicants submitted that the Applicants desired to apply for reinstatement of the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 and since the said Respondents are already dead, the Applicants would file an appropriate application for the said purpose. 4 It is required to be noted that the said Civil Application Nos.347 of 2006 and 346 of 2006 have been dismissed for nonprosecution on account of a technical reason viz since the service was not effected on the heirs of the original Respondent Nos.5 and 6. The Civil Application Nos.1321 of 2008 and 1322 of 2008 are required to be allowed and are accordingly allowed, resultantly the Civil Application Nos.347 of 2006 and 346 of 2006 are restored to file. 5 On restoration of the said Civil Application Nos.347 of 2006 and 346 of 2006, by consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same are taken up on board for hearing. 6 The learned counsel for the Applicants seeks withdrawal of the said Civil Application Nos.347 of 2006 and 346 of 2006 along with Civil Application No.995 of 2005 to file an appropriate Application for review of the order dated 11/6/2004 so as to obtain relief of reinstatement of original Respondent Nos.5 and 6 in Civil Application No.237 of 2002, upon which the relief for bringing the heirs of the said Respondent Nos.5 and 6 would only be maintainable. The said Civil Application Nos.347 of 2006, 346 of 2006 and 995 of 2005 are accordingly allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. All the above Civil Applications are accordingly disposed of. [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTON CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.648 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant V/s Satyabhama Ashok Jadhavar .. Respondent Ms.U.V.Kejriwal, APP for the State. CORAM: D.B.BHOSALE & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE: 30th August, 2010. P.C. Learned APP is directed to supply spare copy within two weeks from today, failing which appeal shall stand dismissed for non-prosecution without further reference to the Court. If the spare copy is supplied by the learned APP, office to issue notice to the Respondent, returnable within eight weeks thereafter. Stand over for eight weeks. (R.G.KETKAR, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 648 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra. ... Appellant Vs. Satyabhama Ashok Jadhavar. ... Respondent Mr. K.V.Saste, APP for the Appellant/ State. None for the Respondent. CORAM : : A.M. KHANWILKAR and P.D. KODE, JJ. DATE : : 25th October, 2010. P.C. 1 Office remark indicates that warrant of arrest is still unexecuted qua the Respondent. The appeal pertains to year 2006. Sufficient time has been given to the Appellant – State to serve the Respondent. By way of indulgence and last opportunity, we give ten weeks time to the Appellant to execute the warrant of arrest so as to comply with requirement of Section 390 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Failure to comply with the conditional order will result in dismissal of appeal without further reference to the Court. 2 Copy of this order be forwarded to the Secretary, Home Department for information and necessary action against the concerned officials. [ P.D. KODE, J ] [ A.M. KHANWILKAR, J ]

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.648 OF 2006 ...... ...... The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant Versus Satyabhama Ashok Jadhavar ...Respondent Mr.K.V.Saste, A.P.P. for Appellant/State. None for Respondent. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED:- JANUARY 10, 2011. P.C. Wrongly on Board. On account of the conditional order dated 25th October, 2010, the Appeal is already dismissed for non-prosecution. Removed from the Board. (A.R.JOSHI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8514/2018 Prashanti CHS Ltd. … Petitioner V/s. District Dy. Registrar of Cooperative Society & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Zain Mookhi a/w. Ms. Palak Patel & Ms. Janhavi Doshi i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for the Petitioner CORAM: K.K. TATED & S. K. SHINDE, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 4, 2018 P.C. : 1 Heard. By this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner challenges the order dated 31.05.2016 passed by the learned District Dy. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Mumbai – 4, the competent authority u/s.5A of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the promotion of construction, sale, management and transfer) Act,1963 rejecting the Petitioner's Application for deemed conveyance. 2 Hence, office to verify and place the matter before appropriate Bench. (S. K. SHINDE, J.) ( K. K. TATED, J. ) Basavraj Gurappa Patil Digitally signed by Basavraj Gurappa Patil Date: 2018.10.06 13:23:16 +0530 Basavraj G. Patil 1/1

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti CoOp. Hsg. Society Ltd. … Petitioner V/s. District Deputy Registrar of Coop. Society & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Zain Mookhi a/w Ms. Palak Patel and Ms. Janhavi Doshi for the Petitioner. Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1 State. CORAM : V.L. ACHLIYA, J. DATE : 13th FEBRUARY, 2019. P.C. : Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 13.03.2019. Learned A.G.P. waives the notice for Respondent No.1. In addition the service through the process of Court, the Petitioner is granted liberty to serve the Respondents by all other modes of service as permissible in law. Parties are put to notice that Petition may be heard finally at the stage of admission. (V.L. ACHLIYA, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Cooperative Housing Society Limited .....Petitioner V/s. District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative .....Respondents Society and others Mr. Zain M. a/w Ms. Janhavi Doshi i/b Mansukhlal H. & Co. for the Petitioner Mr. Sandeep Maurya for Respondent no. 6 Mr. Rajesh A. Kanojia for Respondent nos. 2 to 5 CORAM : S. S. SHINDE, J. DATE : MARCH 13, 2019. P.C. The learned counsel appearing for Respondents seek three weeks time so as to enable them to file reply. 2 Time is granted as prayed for. Stand over to 08/04/2019. Needless to observe that copy of the reply be served upon the learned counsel for the Petitioner in advance. [S. S. SHINDE, J.]

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ….. Petitioner VERSUS District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society & Ors. ….. Respondents Mr.Zain Mookhi, i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company for the Petitioner. Mr.S.D.Rayrikar, A.G.P. for the Respondent no.1. Ms.Krishna Borkate, i/b. Mr.R.A.Kanojia for the Respondent nos. 3 to 5. Mr.Sandeep Maurya for the Respondent no.6. CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : th APRIL, 2019 8 P.C . Learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 3 to 5 by way of last opportunity prays for time till 22nd April,2019 for filing reply. Time granted as prayed for as last opportunity. A copy of the reply shall be served in advance upon the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. List the writ petition on board on 26th April,2019. [S.S.SHINDE, J.]

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ....Petitioner V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society ....Respondent And Ors CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J DATE : 26th April, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 19.07.2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: 44-WP-8514-18.DOC Sayali Upasani IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.- 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-Op Hsg. Soc. Ltd ...Petitioner Vs. District Deputy Registrar of Co-op Soc. And Others ...Respondents Ms. Sayali Puri i/b Mansukhlal Hiralal and Co., for Petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Maurya, for Respondent No. 6. Mr. Rajesh Parwani, for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Mr. S. H. Kankale, AGP for State. CORAM:- N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED:- 3rd JULY, 2023 PC:- Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Mr. Parwani, the learned Counsel submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and undertakes to file Vakalatnama. It seems that the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 have already filed an affidavit-in-reply. By way of final indulgence, three weeks time is granted to the Counsel to file Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and work out the matter. Stand over to 24th July, 2023. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited....PETITIONER V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR J DATE : 24th July, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 07/08/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 21: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited....PETITIONER V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society And Ors ....RESPONDENT Mr. Akash Rebello a/w Ms. Sayali Puri and Mr. Mohammed Lokhandwala i/b Mansukhlal Hiralal and Co for Petitioner Mr. Piyush Raheja i/b Rajesh Parwani for Respondent No. 2 to 5 Mr. C. D. Mali AGP for State for Respondent No. 1 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE J DATE : 4th September, 2023 P.C. : S. O. to 25/09/2023 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ...Petitioner Versus District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society and Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Akash Rebello a/w Ms. Purvi Asheri, Ms. Sayali Puri, Mr. Mohammed Lokhandwala i/by Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for Petitioner. … … Mr. Piyush Raheja i/by Mr. Rajesh Parwani, for Respondent Nos.2 to 5. Mr. Sandeep Maurya, for Respondent No.6. Mr. P. P. Pujari, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 25 2023. P.C.: Petitioner-Society has filed this Petition challenging order dated 31 May 2016 passed by District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai City (4) and Competent Authority rejecting the application filed by Petitioner-Society for grant of unilateral deemed conveyance. I have heard Mr. Rebello, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioner, Mr. Raheja, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, Mr. Maurya, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.6 and Mr. Pujari, the learned A.G.P. appearing for Respondent No.1. Perusal of the impugned order dated 31 May 2016 would indicate that the main reason why the Competent Authority had rejected the application for deemed conveyance is the alleged amalgamation of plot of Petitioner-Society with the neighbouring plot of Nirmal's Nest Cooperative Housing Society. ("Nirmal's Nest"). Another ground for rejection is nonimpleadment of Nirmal's Nest Society. I find both the grounds of rejection to be totally untenable. Firstly, there is no concrete evidence of two plots being amalgamated. Reliance is placed on a communication issued by the Municipal Corporation on 19 October 2007 for the purpose of arriving at a conclusion that there is amalgamation of plots bearing C.T.S. No.2403 of Plot Eksar and C.T.S. No.436 of Village Borivali. The relevant portion of the communication reads thus: " Your plans submitted of the layout/amalgamation of above plot along with your letter dated 20.10.2006 are approvable as they are as per Development Control Rules, subject to the terms and conditions already registered under No.BDR2-06908-2007 dated 16.10.2007. These terms and conditions of the layout shall be binding not only on the Owners for the time being but also on their heirs executors, administrators, assignees and every person deriving title through or under them. Final approval to the amalgamation/layout will be given after you construct the roads including lighting, drainage, sewerage, etc and recreation amenity spaces is developed by leveling and adequate number of trees are provided on the same. You will please make it clear to your client that in case of breach of any of the terms and conditions, the deposit amount is liable to be forfeited and the permission granted liable to be revoked." The communication of Municipal Corporation dated 19 October 2007 would indicate that the Municipal Corporation had merely stated that the proposal of amalgamation was "approvable". The communication does not approve the amalgamation nor effects such amalgamation. Furthermore, the amalgamation of plots will have to be done by Revenue Authorities and not by Municipal Corporation. Municipal Corporation, being a Planning Authority, may consider whether joint development could be carried out on two neighbouring plots. Actual amalgamation of two C.T.S. numbers will have to be ultimately approved by the revenue authorities. Furthermore even if such amalgamation was to take effect on the basis of communication dated 19 October 2007, the same would have no effect on right of Petitioner-Society to seek deemed conveyance in respect of plot bearing C.T.S No.436, Village Borivali. It is submitted that a common developer appointed by Petitioner and Nirmal's Nest Society, who had decided to construct building on both plots and had moved a proposal before MCGM for sanctioning plans on amalgamated plots. That the said developer had already been removed and at present there is no proposal for effecting joint development on two plots. Be that as it may. The amalgamation has not actually been effected and even if it was to be effected, the same would not defeat the right of the Petitioner-Society to seek deemed conveyance. The ground of non impleadment of Nirmal's Nest Society for rejection of unilateral deemed conveyance by the competent authority is also unfounded. The Petitioner-Society is claiming deemed conveyance of land on which its building is standing. For considering that application, why presence of neighbouring society is necessary is difficult to fathom. I am therefore of the view that the presence of Nirmal's Nest Society is not necessary while deciding application for grant of unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of Petitioner-Society. I therefore find that the impugned order dated 31 May 2016 passed by the competent authority to be indefensible. The competent authority is required to ignore the aspect of amalgamation and reconsider the application filed by Petitioner-society for grant of deemed conveyance. Accordingly, order dated 31 May 2016 is set aside and the proceedings are remanded to the competent authority for a fresh decision. All contention of parties, except on issues of amalgamation and joinder of Nirmal Nest Society, are let open. The Writ Petition is accordingly partly allowed. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ..Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra . ..Respondents Ms. Sheetal Gaikar i/b. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicant. Mr. A.A.Palkar, APP for the State. CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : 26th AUGUST, 2022. P.C. Issue Notice to Respondent No.2. Learned APP to make an endeavor to intimate the next date of hearing to the Respondent No.2, through the officer of the concerned police station. Stand over to 13.09.2022. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Shri. Tushar Sonawane for Applicant. Shri. A. A. Palkar, APP for the State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH D. NAIK J DATE : 11th October, 2022 P.C. : Await service. Stand over to 20/10/2022. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. ...Respondents Mr. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicant. Mr. V. B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State. $cdots cdots cdots$ $cdots cdots cdots$ CORAM: N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 20 OCTOBER 2022 $P.C. :=$ The Investigating Officer shall intimate about the filing of the present application and the next date of hearing of the application to the respondent No. 2. $2.$ Stand over to 16 November 2022. $(N.R. BORKAR, J.)$

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr. V. B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for Respondent-State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. R. BORKAR J DATE : 16th November, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 05/12/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra ••• Respondent Mr. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicant. Mr. V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State. Mr. Ravi Rajulwar, API, Sangola Police Station, Solapur. CORAM : R.N.LADDHA, J. DATE : 5 th December 2022 P.C. : The Investigating Officer is directed to inform the first informant about filing of the present application within a week. Stand over to 15 th December 2022. (R.N. LADDHA, J) Lata Panjwani, P.S.

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore Versus The State of Maharashtra Applicant. Respondent Mr. Tushar Sonawane, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State. Mr. Ashish Satpute, Legal Aid Counsel appointed. CORAM : R. N. Laddha, J. DATE: 15 th December 2022 Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL SUNIL PANJWANI PANJWANI Date: 2022.12.16 11:15:15 +0530 P.C.: Learned APP informs this Court that the Applicant is not in a position to engage private Advocate and requests to provide legal aid. Mr.Ashish Satpute, Counsel from the Legal Aid Panel is appointed as Advocate to espouse the cause of the Applicant. Office is directed to serve a copy of the Application to the learned counsel appointed on behalf of the Applicant. Page No. 1 of 2 15 th December 2022 36 ba 1685.22.docx Stand over to 9 th January 2023. (R. N. LADDHA, J.) L.S.Panjwani, P.S. Page No. 2 of 2 15 th December 2022

Order - Status 15: ba 1685.22 speaking.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore Versus The State of Maharashtra Applicant. Respondent CORAM : R. N. Laddha, J. (IN CHAMBER) DATE: 5 th January 2023 P.C.: The matter is taken in chamber suo moto. In Paragraphs 1 & 2 of the order dated 15 th December 2022, wherever the words 'Applicant' is there, it be replaced by words 'Respondent No.2'. The order dated 15 th December 2022 stands corrected accordingly. (R. N. LADDHA, J.) L.S.Panjwani, P.S. Page No. 1 of 1 15 th December 2022

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Tushar Sonawane a/w Pooja Satpute for Applicant. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for State. Mr. Amit Icham i/b Ashish Satpute for Complainant. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 8th February, 2023 P.C. : S. O. to 15/02/2023 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Tushar Sonawane a/w Pooja Satpute for Applicant. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for State. Mr. Ashish Satpute for Respondent No. 2 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 15th February, 2023 P.C. : S. O. to 17/02/2023 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: Urmila Ingale 22.ba 1685.22.doc URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Digitally signed by URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Date: 2023.02.17 14:22:07 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ...Applicant VS. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr. Tushar Sonawane a/w Ms.Pooja Satpute, for the Applicant. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 17, 2023 P.C. : The matter to come up in due course. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ..Applicant $v/s$ . The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent Mr. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicant. Mr. Ashish Satpute for the Respondent No.2 Mrs. A.A.Takalkar, APP for the State. CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : $13 th $ APRIL, 2023. $P.C.$ $1.$ This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the aforesaid Applicant, who is facing trial in Special Case No.7 of 2021 pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pandharpur. The said case arises from Crime No. 10 of 2022, registered with Sangola Police Station for the offences under Section 354, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4, 8, 12 and 42 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act. $2.$ Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 and learned APP for the State. I have perused PRASANNA P SALGAONKAR the records and considered the submissions advanced by the learned Digitally signed by PRASANNÄ‚ P SALGAONKAR Date: 2023.04.18 10:37:49 p +0530 Counsels for the respective parties. The aforesaid crime was registered pursuant to the FIR lodged by the mother-in-law of the victim. She has stated that on 04.01.2022 she had gone in search of the victim, who had gone to wash clothes near the rivulet (Odha). She saw the Applicant pulling the victim by her hand and heard the victim crying for help. She has stated that she had also heard the Applicant threatening her not to shout. When she intervened the Applicant left the victim and ran away from the spot. Based on the said report, initially crime was registered under Section 354, 506 of IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. Statement of the victim was recorded. The victim claimed that the Applicant had touched her chest and private parts. On the basis of the allegations made by the victim, Section 4 and 8 also came to be added. It is to be noted that though the Applicant is charged for committing offences under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, the statement of the victim does not prima facie indicate that the Applicant had committed penetrative sexual assault. In such circumstances, in my considered view, prima facie, the offence under Section 4 of not made out. The maximum sentence in respect of other offences is five years. The Applicant was arrested on 04.01.2022 and is presently in Judicial Custody. Considering the large pendency, the trial is not likely to commence in the near future. The application filed by the Applicant has been rejected mainly on the ground of antecedents of the Applicant. Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that the Applicant shall not visit Sangola District, Solapur, till the evidence of the victim is recorded. Considering the above facts and circumstances, in my considered view, this would be a fit case, to exercise discretion under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the Applicant. Hence the application is allowed on the following terms and conditions:- (i) The Applicant who is facing trial in Special Case No.7 of 2021 pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pandharpur arising out of Crime No. Crime No. 10 of 2022, registered with Sangola Police Station, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twentyfive Thousand Only) with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount; (ii) The Applicant shall not visit Sangola District till the evidence of the victim is recorded. (iii) The Applicant shall report to the nearest police station on the first Monday of every month till the date of framing of charge; (iv) The Applicant shall not interfere with the complainant or the other witnesses, or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (v) The Applicant shall keep the Special Court as well as the Investigating Officer informed of his permanent as well as temporary address, and his contact details, and/or change of residence or mobile details from time to time. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Niranjan Shrikant Mundargi For Applicant Prashant Jadhav App for state. Jayesh D.Talekar adv for intervener. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 3rd June, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 06/06/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Niranjan Shrikant Mundargi For Applicant Prashant Jadhav App for state. Jayesh D.Talekar adv for intervener. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 6th June, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant, Stand over to 13/06/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 13th June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time , Stand over to 14/06/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir .Applicant P.C. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & anr. .Respondents Mr. N. S. Mundargi, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr. P. H. Gaikwad, APP, for the Respondent No. 1 – State Mr. N. V. Sawant i/b. Mr. J. D. Talekar, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 2 / Intervenor CO CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DA DATE : 14.06.2019 . Mr. Mundargi, learned counsel for the Applicant seeks two weeks time to take instructions. Stand over to 28.06.2019 . (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 28th June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time , Stand over to 08/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent None present for applicant N.V.Sawant i/by Jayesh D. Talekar Res No. 2 S.V.Gavand App for state. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 8th July, 2019 P.C. : None present for applicant,Stand over to 10/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent MS.Keral Mehta i/by Niranjan Shrikant Mundargi For Applicant Jayesh D. Talekar Res No. 2 P.H.Gaikwad Patil App for state. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 10th July, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 15/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 15th July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time ,Stand over to 01/08/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 1st August, 2019 P.C. : Due to Paucity of time, stand over to 05/08/2019. Ad interim relief,if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Niranjan Shrikant Mundargi For Applicant JN.V.Sawant i/by ayesh D. Talekar Res No. 2 P.H.Gaikwad Patil App for state. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 5th August, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 08/08/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Niranjan Shrikant Mundargi For Applicant N.V.Sawant i/by Jayesh D. Talekar Res No. 2 P.H.Gaikwad App for state. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 8th August, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 09/08/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 28: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra Respondent Gaueav Thote i/by Niranjan Shrikant Mundargi For Applicant N.V.Sawant i/by Jayesh D. Talekar Res No. 2 P.H.Gaikwad Patil App for state. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 9th August, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 13/08/2019 under the caption of URGENT ADMISSION. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 30: Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir .Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & anr. .Respondents Mr. Niranjan S. Mundargi, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr. P. H. Gaikwad-Patil, APP, for the Respondent No. 1 – State Mr. N. W. Sawant i/b. Mr. Jayesh D. Talekar, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 2 CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. P.C. DATE : 13.08.2019 . Heard learned counsel for the Applicant. By this Application, the Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C. R. No. I-80 of 2019 registered with the APMC Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the Applicant without going into the merits of the Application states that the Applicant is ready to deposit Rs. 59,50,000/- in the Registry of this Court, without prejudice to his rights & contentions. Learned counsel for the Applicant has tendered an undertaking of the Applicant duly affirmed before this Court. The said undertaking is taken on record and marked as "X" for identification. In the said undertaking, the Applicant has in para 2 stated that he without prejudice to his rights and contentions, only to show his bonafides is willing to deposit Rs. 59,50,000/- in the Registry of this Court; that an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- will be deposited in this Court on or before 19.08.2019 and the balance amount of Rs. 39,50,000/- within a period of eight weeks from today. Without going into the merits, having regard to the undertaking given by the Applicant, the Applicant is granted interim protection on the following terms & conditions :- O R D E R (i) In the event of arrest, the Applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; (ii) The Applicant shall report to the investigating officer of the concerned police station on 20th, 21st & 22nd August, 2019 between 10.00 a. m. and 12.00 noon and thereafter, as & when called for by the investigating officer; 2 of 3 (iii) The Applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/ on or before 19.08.2019 in the Registry of this Court and the balance amount of Rs. 39,50,000/- within eight weeks from today. If there is a breach in depositing the aforesaid amount, it is made clear that the interim relief shall stand vacated without further reference to the Court. Stand over to 27.08.2019 . To be listed on the Supplementary Board " For recording compliance of the first deposit of Rs. 20,00,000/- ". All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 32: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. Respondents Mr. Niranjan S. Mundargi for the Applicant Ms. P. P. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent-State Ms. Jayesh Talekar for the Intervener CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. TUESDAY, 27th AUGUST 2019 P.C. : 1 Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has deposited Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs) as directed by this Court vide order dated 13th August 2019. He further submits that the balance amount i.e. Rs. 39,50,000/- will be deposited on or before 8 th October 2019. 2 Stand over to 10th October 2019 for recording compliance of the said deposit. To be listed on the supplementary board. 3 Ad-interim relief granted earlier to continue till the next date. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 34: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Niranjan S. Mundargi for the Applicant Ms. P. H. Gaikwad-Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent-State Ms. Jayesh Talekar for the Respondent No.2/Complainant CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. THURSDAY, 10th OCTOBER 2019 P.C. : 1 Learned counsel for the applicant seeks time. On his request, stand over to 14th November 2019. 2 Needless to state that the interim relief stands vacated in view of the order dated 13th August 2019, as the applicant has committed breach of the undertaking to deposit Rs. 39,50,000/-. 3 Liberty to move the Vacation Court in the event the applicant intends to deposit the amount before the next date, for restoration of the interim relief. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 36: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 19th December, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 22/01/2020 . 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 38: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 22nd January, 2020 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 07/02/2020 . 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 40: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 7th February, 2020 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 03/03/2020 . 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 42: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 3rd March, 2020 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 24/03/2020 . 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 44: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. Respondents - Mr. Niranjan S. Mundargi, for the Applicant. Mr. S. V. Gavand, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1 – State. None for the Respondent No.2/Complainant. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 2nd AUGUST, 2021 P.C. : Learned Counsel for the applicant states that pursuant to the order dated 13th August 2019, the applicant deposited an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- in this Court, however could not deposit the balance amount of Rs.39,50,000/- as undertaken within 8 weeks from the date of the order i.e. 13th August 2019. He submits that the applicant is bed-ridden and that the family members of the applicant will make an attempt/endeavour to deposit the said amount of Rs.39,50,000/- within 15 days from today. He submits that the said amount will be deposited in the Registry of this Court on or before 16th August 2021. Stand over to 17th August, 2021. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 46: 1-aba.1087.2019.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. Respondents Mr. Niranjan S. Mundargi, for the Applicant. Ms. P. P. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1 – State. None for the Respondent No.2/Complainant. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 17th AUGUST, 2021 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the applicant, stand over to 25th August, 2021. It is made clear that interim relief was already vacated vide order dated 10th October 2019. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 48: RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Digitally signed by RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Date: 2021.08.26 15:56:10 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MATTERS NOTIFIED AT SERIAL NOS.2, 10 TO 13, 46 TO 49 AND 50 TO 54 ON THE BOARD DATED 25th AUGUST, 2021 CAUSE TITLES AND APPEARANCE AS NOTIFIED ON THE BOARD DATED 25th AUGUST, 2021. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 25TH AUGUST, 2021 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, it is not possible to proceed with the hearing of these matters today. All these matters are adjourned and will be listed on the Board on the respective assigned dates as mentioned below : Serial Nos. Assigned Date 2 02/09/2021 10 to 13 01/09/2021 46 to 49 13/09/2021 50 to 54 14/09/2021 Ad-interim order granted in any of the above said matters, if any, to continue till the next date. Order accordingly. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 50: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MATTERS NOTIFIED AT SERIAL NOS. 3 TO 8 AND 10 ON THE BOARD DATED 1st SEPTEMBER, 2021 CAUSE TITLES AND APPEARANCE AS NOTIFIED ON THE BOARD DATED 1st SEPTEMBER, 2021. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 1st SEPTEMBER, 2021 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, it is not possible to proceed with the hearing of these matters today. All these matters are adjourned and will be listed on the Board on the respective assigned dates as mentioned below : Serial Nos. Assigned Date 3 to 6 04/10/2021 7 to 8 & 10 05/10/2021 Ad-interim order granted in any of the above said matters, if any, to continue till the next date. Order accordingly. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 52: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. Respondents Mr. Omneel Jadhav i/b Mr. Niranjan Mundargi, for the Applicant. Ms. P.P. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent–State. None for Respondent No. 2. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.DATE :4th OCTOBER, 2021 P. C. : At the request of learned Counsel for the applicant, stand over to $25^{text{th}}$ October 2021. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 54: Digitally signed by HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Date: 2023.03.23 14:24:38 +0530 2.aba1087.19.doc Shiv IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 1/1 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Ms. Keral Mehta i/b Mr. Niranjan S. Mundargi for the Applicant. Mrs. M. R. Tidke APP for Respondent No.1-State. CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATED : 18TH MARCH 2023 P. C. : The Applicant has expired. Time is sought to place on record the death certificate of the Applicant. Matter be kept on 31st March 2023, under the caption "for dismissal". [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 57: 17.aba1087.19.doc HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Digitally signed by HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Date: 2023.04.05 10:41:45 +0530 Shiv IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1087 OF 2019 Hiraji Hashya Bhoir ...Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Ms. Keral Mehta i/b Mr. Niranjan S. Mundargi for the Applicant. Mr. A. R. Kapadnis APP for Respondent No.1-State. None for Respondent No.2. CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATED : 31ST MARCH 2023 P. C. : On 18th March 2023, there was submission made that the Applicant has expired. In the meantime this fact is confirmed by learned Advocate for the Applicant and she has received instructions to withdraw this Application. Hence Application is disposed of as withdrawn. Liberty is sought on behalf of the Applicant to file Application on behalf of the LRs of the deceased-Applicant for withdrawal of amount already deposited. My attention is invited to the order dated 13th August 2019, thereby directing the Applicant to deposit certain amount. Learned APP submitted that amount cannot be given back. Today, we are only granting liberty to the LRs to file Application. The merits can be considered when that Application is heard for withdrawal of the amount. There is also appearance on behalf of Respondent No.2 in Anticipatory Bail Application. If such Application is filed, Respondent No.2 or learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 may be served. Liberty granted to move such application. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 7: ttm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6006 OF 2011 The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nasik .. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents Mr.Mahesh Agawekar i/b Ms.Anamik Malhotra for the petitioner Mr.P.G.Sawant 'B' Panel for respondent no.1 Mr.J.D.Khairnar for respondent no.2 CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE: 1st AUGUST, 2011 PC: Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, matter is taken for final hearing and disposed of at the stage of admission itself. By this petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner original respondent challenges the order dt. 6.5.2011 passed by learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik, below Ex.U2 filed by respondent no.2 for interim relief to stay the operation and implementation of transfer order dt. 16.12.2010 issued by the petitioner, Zilla Parishad, Nasik. Respondent no.2 is working with the petitioner, Zilla Parishad, Nasik as Desk Officer. Initially, on account of misconduct he was suspended by order dt.1.9.2010. Thereafter, respondent no.2 made representation to the petitioner. Considering respondent no.2's representation, petitioner issued the order dt. 15.12.2010 reinstating respondent no.2 in his original post subject to departmental enquiry. Thereafter, on the next date, petitioner issued transfer order dt.16.12.2010 transferring respondent no.2 on said post to Panchayat Samiti, Surgana. Respondent no.2 joined their as Desk Officer and worked for 4/5 months. Thereafter, respondent no.2 filed a complaint (ULP) No.108 of 2011 before the Industrial Court under Items 3 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU and PULP Act, 1971 along with application for interim relief under section 30(2). In the said complaint, respondent no.2 contended that he is suffering 40% disability and same is declared by the Medical Board as per certificate dt.3.3.2005. Thereafter, on the basis of Government Resolution dt.15.04.2004 and 15.12.2004, he is entitled to be posted near his home town i.e. at Nasik. The said interim application was allowed by leaned Member, Industrial Court by impugned order dt.6.5.2011 and directed petitioner, Zilla Parishad, Nasik to allow respondent no.2 to work at Nasik or near Nasik as per Government Resolution No.15.04.2004 and 15.12.2004. Hence, the present petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Member of Industrial Court erred in coming to the conclusion that respondent no.2 by way of interim relief is entitled to stay the operation and implementation of the transfer order dt. 16.12.2010. He further submits that initially respondent no.2 was suspended on 1.9.2010 and thereafter, considering his applications, they reinstated him on his original post by order dt.15.12.2010 subject to departmental enquiry. He further submits that departmental enquiry is going on against respondent no.2. He further submits that initially respondent no.2 joined the services as per transfer order dt.16.12.2010 at Panchayat Samiti, Surgana without complaining about his disability and thereafter, filed complaint (ULP) No.108 of 2011. He submits that the main complaint is pending for hearing and final disposal. The Industrial Court by interim relief allowed indirectly prayer in the main complaint itself. Therefore, impugned order passed by learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik, dt.6.5.11 is liable to be set aside. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent no.2 vehemently opposed the present petition. He submits that as per Government Resolution dt.15.04.2004 and 15.12.2004 respondent no.2 is entitled to the posting near his home town. He submits that respondent no.2 has his house at Nasik. Since beginning he has stayed there. He submits that the Village Surgana is about 50 to 60 kms from Nasik and therefore, it is very difficult for him to attend his duty there. He submits that after joining at Surgana he noticed that due to 40% disability he is facing several difficulties and therefore, he preferred the present complaint. I have gone through the G.R. dt.15.4.04 and 15.12.04. I have also gone through the reinstatement letter dt.15.12.2010 and transfer order dt.16.12.2010. It is to be noted that initially respondent no.2 was suspended in the year 2010. On his request, petitioner reinstated him on 15.10.10 subject to departmental enquiry. Not only that his main complaint challenging the transfer order dt.15.12.2010 is pending. By interim relief learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik indirectly allowed the respondent no.2's main complaint itself. Considering all these facts, I am of the opinion that the learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik erred in staying operation and implementation of the Tribunal's order dt.16.12.2010 directing petitioner Zilla Parishad, Nasik to allow respondent no.2 to work at Nasik or near Nasik as per G.R. dt.15.4.2010 and 15.12.2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner makes a statement that at present, no post is available at Nasik or near Nasik. Considering these facts, the impugned order passed by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik below Exh.U2 in complaint ULP 108 o 2010 is set aside. 10.Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, hearing of complaint (ULP) No. 108 of 2011 is expedited. 11.Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (K.K.TATED,J.)