All Cases

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 7th June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 04/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 4th July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 29/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 22nd August, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned.Stand over to 16/09/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 16th September, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 09/10/2019 . 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 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 9th October, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 15/11/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 15th November, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 06/12/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1482 OF 2019 Roshan Sunil Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.1483 OF 2019 Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent …... …... Mr.Silvin Y. Kale, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.A.A. Takalkar, APP APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : DECEMBER 20, 2019. P.C. : The applicants in both the applications were arrested in connection with C.R.No.I–291 of 2018, registered with Panvel City Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for the ofence punishable under Section 302j read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2 The case of the prosecution is that on 30th June, 2018, the victim/complainant was waiting at rickshaw stand. Accused Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde spoke to the victim and told him that he want to travel at Karanjade and the fare was fied at Rs.60/-. He boarded rickshaw. The victim dropped him at Karanjade. He paid Rs.50/- towards the fare although it was fied to be Rs.60/-. The victim demanded the balance amount. Accused Avi alias Ajinkya told him that he is associate of Rajesh Kaikadia and slapped him. The victim also slapped him. Thereafter, the victim went towards Panvel railway station and was waiting at rickshaw stand. At about 22:30 hrs., he went for smoking cigarette. Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde came and questioned him as to why he charges heavy fare and left the place. After some time, Ajinkya Shinde, Babu Kaikadia and two other persons approached the victim. Ajinkya Shinde assaulted him with iron rod in his head. As a result the victim fell down. Babu Kaikadia assaulted by knife and two other persons assaulted the victim by fst blows. Babu Kaikadia then assaulted him on head. The mother and wife of the victim reached the spot. Babu Kaikadia also assaulted his mother and all of them fled away from the place of incident. The victim was taken to the hospital. His statement was recorded, which was treated as First Information Report. Subsequently, victim succumbed to the injuries and charge under Section 302 of IPC was invoked. 3 Learned counsel for the applicant appearing for both the applicants submitted that there are major discrepancies in the evidence of witnesses. There are contradictions in the statements of eye witnesses. Applicants are falsely implicated,. There is no evidence against the applicant Roshan Pawar, the eye witnesses have given contradictory versions about the role played by him. Although, the applicant was identifed, subsequent to identifcation, diferent role is attributed to the said applicant. The version of both the eye witnesses were contradictory to each other. The applicants are in custody from the date of arrest and further detention is not necessary. Co-accused Iqbal Abdul Kadir Shaha has been granted bail by this Court. 4 Learned APP submitted that the role has been assigned to both the applicants. Applicant Avinash had picked up quarrel with the deceased. Thereafter, he came along with other accused and the victim was assaulted by weapons. The applicants are identifed by the eye witnesses. Thus, there is suficient evidence against the applicant and bail may not be granted. 5 Having heard both the sides. I have perused the charge–sheet. The frst informant is the victim of the crime. He has stated that accused Avi alias Ajinkya had quarreled with him. Subsequently, he came along with the other accused. In the frst information report, it is stated that Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde had assaulted the victim on his head by iron rod and Babu Kaikadia had assaulted by knife. Two unknown persons had allegedly caught hold of the victim. Thus, the role of assault is attributed to Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde and Babu Kaikadia. During the course of investigation, statement of Naziya and Sherbano were recorded. Naziya had stated in a statement under Section 164 that the victim was assaulted by Avi alias Ajinkya and others. Avi alias Ajinkya was holding iron rod and the other short person was holding knife. The victim was assaulted by iron rod on his head and the other person had assaulted by knife. Her statement was also recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., which is in consonance with her earlier statement. Thus, the said witness categorically stated that Avi alias Ajinkya Shinde had assaulted the victim by iron rod on his head and other persons assaulted by knife. Statement of Sherbano was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She has stated that accused Avi alias Ajinkya and others had assaulted the victim. The identifcation parade was conducted. In the parade Naziya has identifed accused Roshan Pawar and stated that Roshan Pawar had assaulted victim by knife. The other witness Ayesha has also identifed Roshan Pawar and during the identifcation stated that he had assaulted the victim by fst blows. Thus, apparently, there are discrepancies in the evidence with regards to the role played by Roshan Pawar in the FIR, statement of eye witnesses and the identifcation parade. However, as far as Ajinkya @ Avinash Anant Shinde, is concerned, specifc overtact has been attributed to him. There is consistency in the evidence of witnesses. He was the cause of quarrel and incident of murder. The victim as well as other witnesses have attributed him role of assault. In this circumstances, applicant Roshan Pawar can be granted bail, however, applicant Ajinkya @ Avinash Shinde is not entitled for bail. 7 Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: (i) Bail Application No.1482 of 2019, is allowed and disposed of; (ii) Applicant Roshan Sunil Pawar, is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.I– 291 of 2018, registered with Panvel City Police Station, Navi Mumbai, on his eiecuting P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant Roshan Sunil Pawar, shall attend the concerned police station once in a month on frst Saturday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, till the conclusion of the trial; (iv) Bail Application No.1483 of 2019, is rejected. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1205 OF 2019 Uday Manohar Sule .... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ….... Mr.S.V. Marwadi i/b. N.M. Nadar, Advocate for Applicant. Mr.Anilkumar Patil, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 06th JUNE, 2019 P.C. : Learned Counsel for the Applicant on instructions of the daughter of the Applicant, who is present in the Court, prays for withdrawal of this Application. Liberty as prayed for is granted. The Application is allowed to be withdrawn and is disposed of accordingly. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1525 OF 2022 Kiran Sunder Anchan .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Niranjan Mundargi i/b Mr.Vaibhav G. Bagade for the Applicant. ... … Mr.S.V.Gavand, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 10th JUNE, 2022 P.C:- At the request of the learned A.P.P., re-notify to 13/06/2022. ( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1525 OF 2022 Kiran Sunder Anchan ] ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] ... Respondent Mr. Niranjan Mundargi i/b Mr. Vaibhav G. Bagade for the applicant. … Mr. S.V. Gavand, A.P.P. for the State. Mr. Rajiv Sakpal, PI attached to Andheri Police Station is present in the court. … CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 13TH JUNE, 2022. P.C.:- C.R. No.372 of 2022 came to be registered with Andheri Police Station on 23/04/2022, pursuant to a raid conducted in Samit Punjab Restaurant & Bar, Bengali Chawl, Koldongri, Sahara Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai. The incident resulted in invoking Sections 308, 294, 114 and Section 34 of the IPC read with Sections 3, 8(1), (2), (4) and 33 (R) of the Maharashtra Act, 2016. The said C.R. arraign 22 persons as accused and the applicant came to be arraigned as accused No.19. Relying upon the remand report, learned counsel would submit that the Manager as well as the cashier of the concerned Bar, in which the raid was conducted, are arrested. One Shridhar Shetty (accused No.23) is the owner of the Bar, who has been released on bail in an anticipatory bail application. On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the applicant advanced an argument that the applicant is the Manager in one Hotel Mansa Bar & Restaurant, Andheri and he has been arraigned as an accused, without any connection with the raid conducted in Samit Punjab Restaurant & Bar. Learned A.P.P. was, therefore, asked to ascertain the factual position. Learned A.P.P. states that the FIR makes a reference to Kiran Pujari and the applicant is Kiran Sunder Anchan and learned A.P.P. is unable to point out any positive material to demonstrate that the person named in the FIR is the applicant. In any case, when specifically asked as to what is the connection with the owner/Manager of the other Bars, operating within the jurisdiction of Andheri Police Station and why all of them are arraigned as accused, no response is coming forward from the side of the prosecution. In the absence of any involvement of the applicant in the raid, which was conducted in Samit Punjab Restaurant & Bar and since the applicant was neither the owner nor employed in the said Bar and, in fact, the owner of the Samit Punjab Restaurant & Bar is informed to have been granted protection, there is no reason why the same protection cannot be extended to the present applicant. Hence, the following order: ORDER (a) In the event of arrest, the applicant Kiran Sunder Anchan shall be temporarily released on bail in C.R. No.372 of 2022 registered with Andheri Police Station, District Mumbai, on executing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.25,000**/** and furnishing one or two sureties of the like amount. (b) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case and shall not tamper with prosecution evidence. (c) The applicant shall report to the Andheri Police Station from 20/06/2022 to 22/06/2022 between 3.00 p.m. and 5.00 p.m. and, thereafter, as and when directed. List the application along with Anticipatory Bail Application No.1484 of 2022 on 11/07/2022. All parties are directed to act on the downloaded copy of the order supplied by the Advocate under his seal and signature. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1525 OF 2022 Kiran Sunder Anchan ] ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] ... Respondent Mr. Niranjan Mundargi i/b Mr. Vaibhav G. Bagade for the applicant. … Mr. S.V. Gavand, A.P.P. for the State. Mr. Rajiv Sakpal, PI attached to Andheri Police Station is present in the court. … CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 13TH JUNE, 2022. P.C.:- C.R. No.372 of 2022 came to be registered with Andheri Police Station on 23/04/2022, pursuant to a raid conducted in Samit Punjab Restaurant & Bar, Bengali Chawl, Koldongri, Sahara Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai. The incident resulted in invoking Sections 308, 294, 114 and Section 34 of the IPC read with Sections 3, 8(1), (2), (4) and 33 (R) of the Maharashtra AJN This order stands corrected as per speaking to the minutes order dated 17.06.2022 . Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels, Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women (Working therein) Act, 2016. The said C.R. arraign 22 persons as accused and the applicant came to be arraigned as accused No.19. Relying upon the remand report, learned counsel would submit that the Manager as well as the cashier of the concerned Bar, in which the raid was conducted, are arrested. One Shridhar Shetty (accused No.23) is the owner of the Bar, who has been released on bail in an anticipatory bail application. On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the applicant advanced an argument that the applicant is the Manager in one Hotel Mansa Bar & Restaurant, Andheri and he has been arraigned as an accused, without any connection with the raid conducted in Samit Punjab Restaurant & Bar. Learned A.P.P. was, therefore, asked to ascertain the factual position. Learned A.P.P. states that the FIR makes a reference to Kiran Pujari and the applicant is Kiran Sunder Anchan and learned A.P.P. is unable to point out any positive material to demonstrate that the person named in the FIR is the applicant. In any case, when specifically asked as to what is the connection with the owner/Manager of the other Bars, operating within the jurisdiction of Andheri Police Station and why all of them are arraigned as accused, no response is coming forward from the side of the prosecution. In the absence of any involvement of the applicant in the raid, which was conducted in Samit Punjab Restaurant & Bar and since the applicant was neither the owner nor employed in the said Bar and, in fact, the owner of the Samit Punjab Restaurant & Bar is informed to have been granted protection, there is no reason why the same protection cannot be extended to the present applicant. Hence, the following order: ORDER (a) In the event of arrest, the applicant Kiran Sunder Anchan shall be released on bail in C.R. No.372 of 2022 registered with Andheri Police Station, District Mumbai, on executing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.25,000**/**- and furnishing one or two sureties of the like amount. (b) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case and shall not tamper with prosecution evidence. (c) The applicant shall report to the Andheri Police AJN This order stands corrected as per speaking to the minutes order dated 17.06.2022 . Station from 20/06/2022 to 22/06/2022 between 3.00 p.m. and 5.00 p.m. and, thereafter, as and when directed. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed off in the above terms. All parties are directed to act on the downloaded copy of the order supplied by the Advocate under his seal and signature. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1525 OF 2022 Kiran Sunder Anchan ] ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] ... Respondent … … Ms. Keral Mehta for the applicant. Mr. S.V. Gavand, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 17TH JUNE, 2022. P.C.:- Not on board. On mentioning, taken on board. It is pointed out that there are certain errors in the operative part of the order dated 13/06/2022 inasmuch as, the word 'temporarily' appearing in clause (a) of the operative part, is an inadvertent error and the same needs to be deleted. Similarly, paragraph No.6 is an inadvertent error and the same be replaced as follows: "6. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed off in the above terms." The Order dated 13/06/2022 be corrected accordingly. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.] AJN

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1086 OF 2004 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2004. Shri Amarnath Kapoor : Petitioner. versus. Shri D.S.Anand & Anr. : Respondents. Mr.S.V.Marwadi for the petitioner. Mr.D.R.More, APP, for the State. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE,J. DATED : 9th August 2004. P.C. Petitioner is permitted to serve the respondents by RPAD and also by Courier and produce acknowledgement and file affidavit before this Court. S.O. four weeks. ************** 1

Order - Status 13: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1086 OF 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. S.V.Marwadi for appellant. Mr. D.P.Adsule, APP for state. CORAM : V.M.KANADE, J. DATE : November 23, 2004. P.C. :- The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant has filed an affidavit in which it is stated that the first notice sent by the appellant returned unserved and thereafter this court directed fresh notice to be issued. Accordingly, advocate's notice dated 23/8/2004 was taken to the address of Respondent No.1. However, he was not found at the said address on the said date. The notices were also sent to the first respondent by speed post and under certificate of posting on 17/9/2004. Inspite of the service none appears for the respondent. The appellant again to serve notice by speed post and under certificate of posting on respondent No.1 stating therein that on the next date i.e. on 9th December, 2004, the appeal will be finally heard. Office to issue similar notice. Call for record and proceedings. S.O.to 9/12/2004. Parties to act on the ordinary copy of the order duly authenticated.

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 161 OF 2007 Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. --------------------------------------------------------- : : : Court's or Judge's Orders : : Mr. N.N. Gavankar with Arfan Sait for petitioner Mr. D. S. Mhaispurkar, APP CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATED:-8/3/2007 P.C.:- Despite courts direction the State has not filed affidavit. Mr. Mhaispurkar, learned APP seeks time. We direct the State to file affidavit-in-reply. The State should particularly explain as to under what circumstances order dated 23/2/05 was cancelled. Adjourned to 15/3/07. JUDGE. JUDGE.

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Gargi Packaging Industries Through Shri. Rajan Bachav And Ors ....Respondent Shri Shriram S. Kulkarni For Petitioner Mrs V S Nimbalkar, AGP R.no. 2 For Respondent CORAM : R.M. SAVANT., J DATE : 15th February, 2017 P.C. : Mentioned out of turn, stand over to 06/03/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal and others ..Petitioners Versus Gargi Packaging Industries Through Shri. Rajan Anandrao Bachav and others ..Respondents Mr. S. S. Kulkarni for the Petitioners. Mrs. V. S. Nimbalkar, AGP for the Respondent No.2. CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 20th MARCH, 2017 P.C. 1 Heard Mr. S. S. Kulkarni, the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners. 2 Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 17.04.2017. In addition to service of notice through Court, the advocate for the Petitioners shall serve a private notice by Registered Post A.D. and/or by Courier service and/or by hand delivery on the Respondents and shall file affidavit of service before the returnable date. 3 The Respondent No.1 is directed to maintain statusquo as on date in respect of the land in question. 4 Leave to amend so as to substitute Exh.H with the correct Exhibit. Amendment to be carried out within one week. [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1442 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal & Ors. ….. Petitioners VERSUS Gargi Packaging Industries & Ors. ….. Respondents Mr.Shriram S. Kulkarni for the Petitioners. Kiran Varma, i/b. Mr.Kishore Gaikwad for the Respondent no. 1. Mr.J. A.Madane, A.G.P. for the State – Respondent nos. 2 to 4. CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J. DATE : 16th JANUARY, 2018 P.C . Learned A.G.P. states that his clients will file affidavit in reply and would also raise an objection to the maintainability of this petition on the ground that an alternate remedy exist against the impugned order passed by the Tahsildar. Affidavit in reply shall be filed within two weeks from today. It is made clear that no further extension would be granted. A copy of the affidavit in reply shall be served upon the petitioners' advocate simultaneously. Rejoinder if any, shall be filed within one week from the date of service of affidavit in reply and shall serve a copy thereof upon the respondents' advocates simultaneously. The petitioners are also directed to find out whether any alternate remedy exists against the order passed under the provisions of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. S.O. to 13th February,2018 . [R.D. DHANUKA, J.] 1/1

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Gargi Packaging Industries Through Shri. Rajan ....Respondent Bachav And Ors CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J DATE : 13th February, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 13/03/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Gargi Packaging Industries Through Shri. Rajan ....Respondent Bachav And Ors Swapnil Mhatre i/b Shriram S. Kulkarni For Petitioner S.H.Kankal AGP For R.no. 2 Kishore Gaikwad For R. No.1 For Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 23rd August, 2018 P.C. : Stand Over to 06/09/2018.Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Gargi Packaging Industries Through Shri. Rajan ....Respondent Bachav And Ors CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 6th September, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned Stand Over to 27/09/2018. 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 CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Gargi Packaging Industries Through Shri. Rajan ....Respondent Bachav And Ors Shriram S. Kulkarni For Petitioner P.J. Gavnane AGP For R.no. 2 Suhas Adhav i/b Kishore Gaikwad For R. No.1 CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 27th September, 2018 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the respondents no. 1 & 3, Stand over to 19/10/2018. 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 CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Gargi Packaging Industries Through Shri. Rajan ....Respondent Bachav And Ors CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 19th October, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 19/11/2018 alongwith connected matters.Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 19/11/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Gargi Packaging Industries Through Shri. Rajan ....Respondent Bachav And Ors CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J DATE : 18th April, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 24/06/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 28: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal & Ors. …..Petitioners. Vs. Gargi Packaging Industries & Ors. …..Respondents. Mr. Pravartak Khatavkar I/by S.S. Kulkarni for the Petitioners. Mr. C.D. Mali AGP, for the Respondent No. 2State. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 24th JUNE, 2019. P.C.: Stand over to 15th July, 2019. 2 Adinterim relief, if any, to continue till then. (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 30: Tandle IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1442 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 7413 OF 2016 Shakuntala Vithal Bhujbal and Ors. ... Petitioners. Versus Gargi Packaging Industries and Ors. ... Respondents. . . . . . . Mr. S. S. Kulkarni for Petitioners. Mr. Suhas Adhav I/b Kishor Gaikwad for Respondent No.1. Mr. C. D. Mali, AGP for Respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4. . . . . . . CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 15TH JULY, 2019 P. C. : By the present petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners had impugned Order dated 05.02.2016 passed by the Agricultural Land Tribunal/Tahsildar, Dhindori, i.e. respondent no. 2 herein, thereby rejecting the application preferred by the petitioners under Section 63(1A) of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (For short "MTAL Act"). At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 raised a preliminary objection and submitted that, against the impugned order, there is substantive alternate remedy available with the petitioners either before the Collector under Section 74 or under Section 76 before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal of the MTAL Act and without availing the said remedy, the petitioners have preferred present petition directly before this Court. Mr. Kulkarni, learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions of the representative of the petitioners, who is personally present in the Court, submitted that, the petitioners will avail substantive alternate remedy available under the said Act. He submitted that, in view thereof, they may be granted leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to adopt alternate remedy. Leave and liberty granted. Writ Petition is disposed off with aforesaid liberty. Adinterim relief granted by order dated 20th March 2017, to remain in force for three weeks from today. It is needless to mention that, this Court has not adjudicated upon the issue involved in the petition and the petition is disposed off on the basis of the preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel for respondent no.1. In view of the disposal of the main petition Civil Application No. 1442 of 2017 does not survive and is accordingly stands disposed off. (A. S. GADKARI, J.) 2/2