All Cases

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Application No.919 of 2007 In Criminal Appeal No.745 of 2007 Shakil @ Sunil Abdul Raheman Khan .. .. Applicant (Orig. Accused No.2) v/s. The State of Maharashtra .. .. Respondent None for Applicant. Mrs.M.M. Deshmuk h, APP for Respondent ---- CORAM : DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN & SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, JJ. Dated : 23rd August, 2007 P.C. : Heard the learned APP for the Respondent- State. This Application for condonation of delay has been filed by the Applicant (original Accused No.2) for condoning the delay of 4 years and 184 days in filing the above Appeal. This Application is filed through jail. We have perused the said Application and it appears that due to financial constraint and other difficulties, the Applicant could not lodge the above Appeal in time. The Appeal arises out of conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Under the aforesaid circumstances, sufficient cause is made for condonation of delay. There is no case of inaction, negligence or want of bona fide on the part of the Applicant. Hence, the delay in filing the above Appeal is condoned. The Application stands disposed of accordingly. ( DR.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (ROSHAN DALVI, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2095 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1327 OF 2001 Mr.Ramchandra Mr.Ramchandra Dhondi Sawant Applicant V/s State of Maha State of Maharashtra & Ors. Respondents Mr.P.S.Dani i/by M/s.Kiran Jain & Co.for the Applicant. Mr.Vinay Sonpal, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2. CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & NARESH H.PATIL, JJ. DATE : 13th September, 2006. P.C.: Before we proceed to hear this application which has been filed for restoration of Writ Petition No.1327 of 2001 after four years and four months, it is necessary to find out from Respondent No.2 the present position in respect of the Petitioner's land which has been acquired and in respect of which the award has been passed on 1.8.1985. We therefore direct the Respondent No.2 to file reply within a period of three weeks from today. The learned AGP to communicate this order to Respondent No.2 forthwith. Stand over for three weeks. (NARESH H.PATIL,J.) ( B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2049 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1330 OF 2001 Mr.Dnyandeo ...Applicant Laxman Sawant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2095 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1327 OF 2001 Mr.Ramchandra ...Applicant Dhondi Sawant Vs. State...Respondents of Maharashtra & Ors. Mr.P.S.Dani i/b.M/s.Kiran Jain & Co. for the Applicants. Mr.Vinay Sonpal, A.G.P. for the Respondents. CORAM :- B.H.MARLAPALLE & NARESH H.PATIL,JJ. DATE : 7TH OCTOBER, 2006 P.C. 1.Mr.Sonpal,A.G.P. seeks one week's further time to file reply. Time granted. Matter to stand over for one week. (NARESH H.PATIL,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2049 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1330 OF 2001 Mr. Dnyandeo Laxman Sawant ..Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2095 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1327 OF 2001 Mr. Ramchandra Dhondi Sawant ..Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents Mr. P.S. Dani i/by M/s. Kiran Jain & Co. for applicant in both the matters. Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP for State in both the matters. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & J. H. BHATIA,JJ. Dated: December 8, 2006. P.C.: These are the applications filed for restoration of Writ Petition Nos.1330 and 1327 of 2001 respectively which came to be dismissed for default on 6/2/2002 i.e. before about four years and four months. Consequent to the order passed by us on 13/9/2006 the respondent no.2 has filed affidavit in reply and clearly stated that the award was passed on 1/8/1985 and possession was taken over of the subject land on 13/8/1985. The challenge in the original petitions is to the notice dated 12/3/1983 issued by the respondent no.2 and the award dated 1/8/1985. Obviously, the challenge was raised after more than 15 years and the petitions came to be dismissed in default. We do not see any reason to allow these applications at this stage and restore the petitions which by itself were highly belatedly filed. Mr. Dani then stated that the land from the applicants possession has been taken over beyond or in excess of the land stated in the Section 4 notice from the respective survey numbers. Therefore, while rejecting these applications we make it clear that the acquisition of the land must be to the extent of the area mentioned in the notification under Section 4, the declaration under Section 6 and the award passed under Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. If the area of land acquired is in excess of the land for which the award has been passed, we direct the Land Acquisition Officer to pay the compensation as per the award already passed for such excess land as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six months from today. (J.H. Bhatia, J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1352 OF 2017 Lalya @ Vishal Ravindra Dadar Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. Sankalan Das i/by Subhash Hulyalkar For Applicant Ms. Anamika Malhotra,APP for state CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 3rd July, 2017 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant, Stand over to 17/07/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1352 OF 2017 Lalya @ Vishal Ravindra Dadar Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra Respondent Ms. Pranali Kakade i/by Mr. Subhash Hulyalkar for the Applicant. Mr. S. V. Gavand, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATE : 21st AUGUST 2017 P.C. After hearing arguments, it is expressed that this Court is not inclined to grant relief. Upon that Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that Applicant was aged about 18 years and 3 months. The Applicant is behind the bars since last 4 years. She requested that trial be expedited. As the Applicant has been behind the bars since last 4 years, this Court holds proceedings against Applicants needs to be expedited. Trial Court is expected to dispose of the proceedings within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. [T. V. NALAWADE, J]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 651 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1992 OF 2005 The State of Maharashtra & Anr..... Applicants. Versus Devidas Gangaram Gavhane & Ors...... Respondents. Mr. K.K.Tated, AGP for the Applicants. None for the Respondents. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. DATED : 14TH AUGUST, 2007. P.C.: Issue Court notice to the respondents, returnable on 26th September, 2007. In addition to the other modes of service, liberty to serve by Registered Post A. D. as well as humdast granted. Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,J.

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1802 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. Mr.A.P.Mundargi with Mr.Vikas Shivarkar and Mr.Yogesh Pawar for the petitioner. Ms M.H. Mhatre, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 09, 2009. P.C.: Notice, returnable in two weeks. S.A. BOBDE, J.

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 1802 OF 2009 Mr. Jagdish Mohanlal Joshi … Petitioner. V/s. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors. … Respondents. Mr.K.T.S.Tulsi, Senior Counsel with Mr. Gaurav Bhargva, Mr.Lokesh Bhola & Mr.Vishu Anand i/by Omprakash Parihar for the Petitioner. Ms. Rebecca Gonsalves for the Respondent No.1. Ms. V. S. Mhaispurkar, APP for the State. CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI,J. DATE : 25 SEPTEMEBR, 2014 P.C. : 1 Heard. 2 In view of the earlier order of this court, releasing the passport of the Petitioner, the Petitioner does not press for any relief in this writ petition. 3 Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. However, liberty is given to the Petitioner to reagitate all the issues if the occasion arises. (JUDGE) …..

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1016 OF 2011 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Sachin Patil i/b Mr. Manoj A. Patil for the petitioner. Mr. Lalit Jain for respondent no.1B. Mr. Bipin Joshi for respondent no.2. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 P.C. : Colleague of Mr. Manoj Patil, advocate for the petitioner, prays for an adjournment on the ground that Mr. Patil is ill. S.O. for a week. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 31: Ingale FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1014 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1015 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1016 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1017 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's Court's or Judge's orders orders Mr.Sandeep K.Shinde a/w Mr.A.B.Vagyani i/b Mr.Manoj A.Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.R.D.Mishra, Advocate for the Respondents No. 1A to 1B. Mr.Bipin Joshi, Advocate for Respondents No. 3 & 4. CORAM : R.G.KETKAR, J. DATE : 12th February, 2014 P.C. . Heard Mr.Sandeep K.Shinde, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.D.Mishra, learned Counsel for the respondents No. 1A to 1B and Mr.Bipin Joshi, learned Counsel for respondents No. 3 & 4. Since the matters are to be disposed of finally at the state of admission as per order dated 27/04/2011, call for record and proceedings of the case telephonically. The petitioner will file copies of i) plaint ii) report of the court Commissioner and iii) evidence led by the plaintiffs in all the suits and serve the copies in advance on the other side. List the petitions for admission on 26/02/2014 at 3.00 p.m. The parties are put to notice that subject to the time constraint and convenience of the Court, the petitions may be disposed of finally at the stage of admission. (R.G.KETKAR, J.)

Order - Status 34: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1014 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1015 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1016 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1017 OF 2011 GULAMBHAI VALIBHAI RAJE )...PETITIONER V/s. SURESH KALYAJI BHAGAT (since deceased) ) JAYA SURESH BHAGAT AND ORS. )...RESPONDENTS Mr.Ashish P. Pawar i/b. Mr.Manoj A. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.Vijay R. Dubey, Advocate for Respondents Nos.1A & 1B. CORAM: SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J. DATE : 2 nd APRIL, 2014. P.C. : 1 Stand over by Two Weeks, to enable the petitioner to file compilation, pursuant to the order dated 27th April 2011. The counsel for Respondents nos.1A & 1B states that Respondent no.1B died on 23rd March 2014. Petitioner to take the suitable steps. (SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J.)

Order - Status 38: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1014 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1015 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1016 OF 2011 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1017 OF 2011 .... .... Gulambhai Valibhai Raje ..Petitioner Vs. Suresh Kalyani Bhagat (Since Deceased) Through L.Rs. And Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Ashish Pawar, Advocate i/b Manoj Patil for Petitioner. Mr. R.D. Mishra, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1A to 1B. Mr. Sachin Pawar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. CORAM : N.M. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 24 MARCH 2015 P.C.: The learned Counsel for petitioner states that Respondent No.1.B. has expired and seeks time to take necessary steps in that regard. At his request, S.O. to 7 April 2015. [N.M. JAMDAR, J.] S.S.DESHPANDE 1 / 1

Order - Status 41: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1014 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1015 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1016 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1017 OF 2011 Gulambhai, Son of Valibhai Raje. ] … Petitioner Versus Suresh Kalyanji Bhagat (Since Deceased) ] through legal heirs ] 1A Smt. Jaya Suresh Bhagat and Ors. ] … Respondent Mr. Gulambhai Valibhai Raje, Petitioner present in person. Mr. Manoj A. Patil for Petitioner. Mr. V. R. Dubey for Respondent Nos.1A and Ab. CORAM : M. S. SONAK, J. DATE : JULY 07, 2015 P. C. : Mr. Gulambhai Valibhai Raje, Petitioner, appears in person and states that his Advocate is unwell and therefore unable to attend the Court. The record reveals that this matter has been taken up for consideration no less than 54 times. There is an interim order, which affects the Respondents. Nevertheless, at the request of Mr. Gulambhai Valibhai Raje, stand over to 15/07/2015. It is made clear that in case, the Counsel for the Petitioner is not present and does not proceed with the matter on the next occasion, the appropriate orders shall be made, including orders for dismissal of this petition for nonprosecution. (M. S. SONAK, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 93 OF 2012 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 122 OF 2010 Anil Narayan Joshi & Ors. ..Applicants versus The Secretary, Urban Development Department & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Shriram Kulkarni for Applicants. Mr. A. B. Vagyani - Assistant Government Pleader for State - Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Mr. Mandar Limaye for Respondent No. 6. CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. 18 July 2012 P.C. : Heard the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State - respondent nos. 1 to 5 and the learned counsel for the respondent no. 6. Civil application is moved by the applicants seeking direction to the respondents Corporation as well as the State Government to take appropriate action against illegal construction which has come up on Survey No. 285 at Kolshet, Patilpada Thane and Survey Nos. 139 and 271 at Mauje Kavesar, Thane. Counsel for the applicants has submitted that so far as Survey No. 285 is concerned, respondent Corporation as being a Planning Authority be directed to take action for removal of unauthorized construction / encroachment; whereas construction which has come up on Survey No. 139 and 271, the State Government has jurisdiction to deal with this aspect, therefore State may be directed to do so. The learned counsel for the respondent Corporation has submitted that the construction, if any, which has come up on Survey No. 285 and if the same is unauthorized and illegal, appropriate action in accordance with law shall be taken, at the earliest. The learned Assistant Government Pleader has submitted that the construction, if any, which has come up on Survey Nos. 139 and 271 is concerned, if the same is unauthorized and illegal, appropriate action with the help of the respondent Corporation in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard shall be taken, at the earliest. 2/3 In view of the above referred facts particularly in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the Corporation as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader, it is evident that if the construction on the concerned survey numbers is unauthorized and illegal, appropriate action would be taken by the respective Planning Authorities. Hence, no further action so far as the civil application is concerned is necessary. Civil application is disposed of accordingly. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, J.) Chandka

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Aashish Satpute for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th January, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 29/01/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 29th January, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 07/02/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 7th February, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 01/03/2024 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 1st March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 15/03/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 19/03/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 19th March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 15/04/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Amit Icham for Applicant. Mr. Pandruang H. Gaikwad, APP for State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th April, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 06/05/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 6th May, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 01/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 1st July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 08/07/2024. Interim order, 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 CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 8th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 11/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Advait Tamhankar i/by Mr. Aashish Satpute for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State/Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 11th July, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 19/07/2024 ( at 2:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 27: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 19th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 23/08/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Chaitanya Purankar i/by Mr. Amit Icham for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State/Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 23rd August, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 13/09/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 33: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ] Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra ] Respondent Mr.Advait Tamhankar i/b Aashish Satpute for the Applicant. Ms.Sangita Phad, APP for the State. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J RESERVED ON : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 3rd OCTOBER, 2024. P.C. : 1 The Applicant/Accused in Crime No.6/2022 registered with Pune ATS, is seeking regular bail. 2 The aforesaid offence is made punishable under Section 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short "NDPS Act"). 3 The Applicant, on secret inputs was apprehended on 02.05.2022 after having found in possession of 118 Grams of Mephedrone costing around Rs.11,80,000/-. The seizure carried out in the investigation of the aforesaid offence, is of commercial quantity. 4 In the aforesaid backdrop, the learned counsel for the Applicant while seeking regular bail would urge that the Respondent/Investigating Officer has failed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. So as to substantiate the aforesaid contention, my attention is invited to the nature, the mode and manner in which the recovery was effected from the Applicant. The learned counsel would urge that since it is mandatory to follow the procedure laid down in the aforesaid provisions of the NDPS Act, the Applicant is entitled to be released on bail, as the recovery was neither effected by a Gazetted Officer, nor search. 5 The learned APP, while opposing the prayer for bail would urge that not only the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 50 read with 41 to 43 of the NDPS Act is complied with, but also the report of Chemical Analyser certifies the contraband seized from the Applicant, being banned substance. It is claimed that the Applicant is already charge-sheeted and there is enough iota of evidence to directly connect the Applicant to the crime. As such, it is urged that the Application is liable to be rejected. 2/4 6 Having appreciated the rival claims, it is appreciated that on specific inputs the Applicant was apprehended on 02.05.2022 at about 6.30 p.m. and he was sensitized about his right under Section 41, 42, 43 and 50. The written consent given by the Applicant for carrying out personal search by the Police Officer sufficiently speaks of compliance of the statutory mandate as provided under the NDPS Act. 7 Apart from above, the station diary entry was made about the offence and the same was immediately forwarded to the immediate superior by the Assistant Police Inspector. As such, there is compliance of Section 42, so also Section 50. 8 Apart from above, the quantity seized from the Applicant appears to be certified by the Chemical Analyser to be a banned substance under the NDPS Act. The said quantity is commercial in nature. In the aforesaid backdrop, prima-facie, no technical flaw could be noticed in the investigation against the Applicant. Perusal of the investigation papers depict that there is strong evidence available against the Applicant so as to infer his prima facie involvement in the offence in question and the offence being grave in nature, I see no reason to consider and grant the prayer for releasing the Applicant on bail. 9 Apart from above, the Courts below have consequently rejected his regular Bail Applications by recording the cogent reasons. In this background, the Application stands rejected. (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J)