All Arbitration Petition (uppercase variant)

Order - Status 5: 35APL6222016.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 622 OF 2016 Kapil Vilas Gandhi …Applicant Versus Ritesh Khandewal & Anr. …Respondents Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam, for the Applicant. Dr. F.R. Shaikh, APP for Respondent No.2State. CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 20th June 2016 P.C. : Heard learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and learned APP for 2nd Respondent. Issue notice to the 1st Respondent returnable on 4th August 2016. In addition to service through Court, the Advocate for the Applicant is directed to serve private notice along with an authenticated copy of this order. If proper Affidavit of Service is not filed on or before 27th July 2016, the Application shall stand dismissed for non prosecution without further reference to the Court. By way of adinterim relief, we direct that though 35APL6222016.doc investigation shall continue in the subject F.I.R., ChargeSheet shall not be filed as against the Applicant. [A.A. SAYED, J.] [A.S. OKA, J.]

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 662 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memorandam of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None for the Applicant. Shri. A.S.Patil, APP. for the State. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 02nd August, 2016 P.C. None for the applicant. Even on earlier occasion none appeared for the applicant. Dismissed for non prosecution. (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 8: Vidya amin IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION AND CIVIL/CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S. OKA & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE : 4TH AUGUST, 2016. P.C. On account of paucity of time, rest of the matters on Supplementary Board are adjourned to dates fixed as per the CMIS (Court Management Information System) which read as under: Sr. Nos. C.M.I.S. Date 44, 45, 46, 51, 52, 53 (Cri.) 28/11/2016 47(Cri) 15/06/2017 48 (O.S.), 60 (Cri.) 16/08/2016 49, 50 (Cri.) 27/09/2016 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 (Cri) 29/11/2016 61 (Cri.) 21/10/2016 62, 63 (O.S.) 21/09/2016 64, 66 (Cri.) 27/09/2016 65 (Civil) 25/08/2016 67 (Cri.) 18/08/2016 If in any of the above matters, adinterim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates fixed in the matters. If adinterim or interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. If there is an extreme urgency, the parties can get the papers produced before this Court. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (A.S. OKA, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 622 OF 2016 Kapil Vilas Gandhi ....Applicant V/S Ritesh Khandewal And Anr ....Respondent Kuldeep U. Nikam For Applicant Mr. A. K. Saxena a/w Ravi Subash Rattesar Respondent No.1 Dr. F. R. Shaikh APP for state CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ DATE : 27th September, 2016 P.C. : Place the petition on 28/09/2016 at 12.30 p.m. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 622 OF 2016 Kapil Vilas Gandhi …Applicant Versus Ritesh Khandewal & Anr. …Respondents Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam, for the Applicant. Dr. F.R. Shaikh, APP for Respondent No.2-State. Mr.A.K.Saxena i/b Mr.Ravi S.Rattesar for the Respondent No.1. ... CORAM : A.S.OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 28 SEPTEMBER 2016 P.C.: Learned APP has tendered across the bar, the report dated 22 September 2016 submitted by the Sub-Inspector of Police of Lonawala City Police Station. In the report, it is stated that the charge sheet is being filed by the police against the accused Vicky Rajpal. Further, it is stated therein that there was no material found against the Applicant showing his involvement in the crime and therefore, charge sheet will not be filed as against the present Applicant. The statement is accepted. The report is taken on record and marked "R-1" for identification. The report shall be kept in a sealed envelope and copies of the report shall not be furnished to any party without express order of this Court. In view of the aforesaid statement made in the report, the present Application for quashing the First Information Report need not be entertained. Learned Counsel for the first Respondent submits that there is a material against the Applicant. However, it is for the first informant to take appropriate steps in that behalf. Suffice it to say that in view of what is stated in the report, at this stage, the present Application for quashing the First Information Report need not be entertained and the same is accordingly disposed of. In any event, under the orders of the Court if the police are permitted to carry out any further investigation as against the Applicant, it will be open for the Applicant to file a fresh Application seeking a relief which is sought in this Application. Subject to what is observed above, the Application is disposed of. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (A.S.OKA, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 596 OF 2018 Seema Hariom Sharma ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....Respondent None For Applicant Neeta S. Jain, APP for state. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 12th June, 2018 P.C. : None For Applicant. Stand Over to 03/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 596 OF 2018 Seema Hariom Sharma ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....Respondent Bhavesh Maheshchandra Thakur For Applicant H.S.Venegaonkar,APP Mrs.N.S.Jain,APP CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 18th June, 2018 P.C. : At the request of Mr.H.S.Venegaonkar, Stand over to one week i.e. 26/06/2018 on supplementary board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 596 OF 2018 Seema Hariom Sharma ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....Respondent Bhavesh Maheshchandra Thakur For Applicant H.S.Venegaonkar,CBI P.H.Gaikwad,APP CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 29th June, 2018 P.C. : Stand over to 02/07/2018 High on board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 701 OF 2017 Mrs. Seema Hariom Sharma … Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 596 OF 2018 Mrs. Seema Hariom Sharma … Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents Mr. Bhavesh Thakur for the applicant. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad for the RespondentState. Mr. H.S. Venegaonkar for the RespondentCBI CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 02nd JULY, 2018. P.C. The applicants have preferred these applications for return of the cash amount of Rs.2,79,000/ and Fixed Deposit Receipts seized during the course of investigation. ... Mr. Venegaonkar learned counsel for CBI on instructions submits that case for disproportionate assets against the husband of applicant is not made out during the course of inquiry and therefore CBI has no objection for allowing these applications. It is further submitted that amount of Rs.2,79,000/ has been deposited in the Bank of BaradaCBI account. The cheque to the tune of the said amount will be issued in favour of the applicant instead of cash. In view of aforesaid statements, both these applications are allowed. RespondentCBI is directed to return the amount of Rs.2,79,000/ by cheque to the applicant within a period of four weeks from today. RespondentCBI is also directed to return Fixed Deposit Receipts which are subject matter of the application to the applicant within four weeks from today. Both these applications are disposed of. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 500 OF 2015 Jyotsana Kiran kale. ..Applicant. Versus Shravani Santosh Ambekar and Another. ..Respondents. WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 501 OF 2015 Santosh R. Ambekar & Ors. ..Applicants. Versus Shravani Santosh Ambekar and Another. ..Respondents. Ms. Shivangi J. Rajak for the Applicants. Mr. Mayur D. Sapkale for Respondent No.1. Mr. J. P. Yagnik, learned APP for the State. Coram : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. Date : June 15, 2015 . P. C. : The Applicants are seeking to quash FIR against them bearing CR No.72 of 2015 registered with Vikroli Police Station at the instance of Respondent No.1 for the offence punishable under sections 498A and 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The Applicants are the accused in the said CR, who have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash the said FIR by consent of the original complainant Respondent No.1 herein. Applicant No.1 in APL No. 501 is the husband of Respondent No.1 and rest of the Applicants are his family members. The Applicant in APL is the sister-in-law of Respondent No. 1. Matrimonial disputes between the parties gave rise to the filing of above FIR. The learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties submitted that during the pendency of investigation into above FIR, with the help and intervention of family members, friends and well-wishers, the parties amicably settled their differences by way of mutual settlement. Pursuant to the same, present applications are filed for quashing the above FIR, by consent of Respondent No.1 In the present applications filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Respondent No.1 has filed separate affidavits dated 27th May 2015 wherein she has stated that she is not interested in continuing with the said FIR. She has solemnly affirmed that she is withdrawing all the allegations made against the Petitioner in the said FIR and that she has no objection for quashing the proceedings of FIR bearing No. 72 of 2015 registered by her with Vikhroli Police Station against the Applicants. Respondent No.1 is personally present before the Court. On specific query made by us, she submitted that she has made the said affidavits on her own free will, without there being any pressure or undue influence. She has further confirmed that she has no objection for quashing the FIR in question lodged by her against the Applicants for the offence punishable under sections 498A and 406 read with of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The Apex Court in B. S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana reported [AIR 2003 SC 1386] has held that in the event of settlement of matrimonial dispute, the FIR under Section 498A can be quashed, even though the said offence is not compoundable in terms of Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. The relevant observations of the Apex Court are contained in Paras 14 and 15 which are reproduced herein below: "14. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent the torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper-technical view would be counter productive and would act against interests of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XXA of Indian Penal Code. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code." Similar view has been taken by the Full Bench of this Court in Abasaheb Yadav Honmane vs. State of Maharashtra [2008(5) LJ.Soft 46]. It can, thus, be seen that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. From the perusal of complaint, it transpires that the allegations are totally personal in nature. There is no element of public law involved in the crime. The offence alleged cannot be said to have any impact on the society. In these circumstances, and especially, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, [(2008) 4 SCC 582], we find that no purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending except burdening the Criminal Courts which are already overburdened. In the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decision as well as in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab [2014 AIR SCW 2065] we are of the considered view that there is no impediment in quashing the FIR in question. In the circumstances, applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). The learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 sought directions to the police to return the jewellery recovered or attached by the police during the course of investigation into above FIR. The learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants in both the applications, after taking instructions from her clients, states that the Applicants have no objection for return of the said jewellery to Respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 shall make a proper application to the police for return of jewellery. Upon such application, police will take appropriate decision within a week of its filing. [SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.322 OF 2016 Mr.Jaydeep Mane for the Applicant Dr.F.R.Shaikh, APP for the Respondent No.1 CORAM :A.S.OKA AND P.D.NAIK,JJ. DATE : APRIL 4, 2016 P.C. 1 We direct the Advocate for the applicant to annex typed copy of the document on page 9. Amendment to be carried out within a period of two weeks from today. Place the application on 3rd May 2016. The Investigating Officer shall remain present in this Court on the next date along with file. (P.D.NAIK,J) (A.S.OKA,J.)

Order - Status 7: 16-apl-322-2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar & Anr. .. Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Vishal L. Kolekar i/by Mr.Jaydeep D. Mane for the Applicant. Dr.F.R.Shaikh, APP for Respondent No.1 CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA & P.D. NAIK, JJ. DATE : 03rd MAY 2016. P.C. Applicants have not complied with the order dated 04th April 2016. Only by way of indulgence that we extend the time granted to the applicant to comply with the said order by a period of three weeks from today. If compliance is not made, the application shall stand dismissed for nonprosecution without further reference to the Court. If the compliance is made, application shall be listed on 11th July 2016. [P.D. NAIK, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION AND ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 18TH AUGUST 2016 P.C. On account of paucity of time, rest of the matters on Daily and Supplementary Board stand adjourned on the dates fixed as per the CMIS. Sr. Nos. C.M.I.S. Date 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36, 37, 48, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 and 63 (Cri) th July 2016 5 34, 35, 42 and 43 (Cri) 16th December 2016 38 (OS) 22nd August 2016 39, 73 and 74 (Civil) 21st December 2016 40 and 67 (Cri) 10th October 2016 41, 47 and 65 (OS) th October 2016 5 44, 45, 46, 49, 50 and 51 (Cri) 19th December 2016 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 (Cri) 20th December 2016 66, 70 (Cri), 71 (OS) and 72 (Cri) 29th August 2016 68 and 69 (Civil) th September 2016 7 If in any of the above matters, adinterim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If adinterim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. (A.A. SAYED, J ) (A.S. OKA, J )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : V.M. KANADE & MS. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ DATE : 16th December, 2016 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 16/02/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 16/02/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Nitesh J. Mohite i/by Mr.Jaydeep D Mane For Applicant Dr. F.R.Shaikh, A.P.P. for Respdt./State. CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ DATE : 16th February, 2017 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant, Stand over to 22/03/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr Nitesh J Mohite i/by Jaydeep D Mane For Applicant Dr F.R.Shaikh APP for state CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ DATE : 22nd March, 2017 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 19/04/2017 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ DATE : 19th April, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 14/06/2017. 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 CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent None for the Applicant. Mrs.M.H.Mhatre - APP for the State. CORAM : RANJIT MORE. & SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, JJ DATE : 14th June, 2017 P.C. : None for the Petitioner/Applicant. S.O. to 12/07/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb Bhagwan Havaldar And Anr ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent None for the Applicant. Mr.S.S.Pednekar - APP for the State. CORAM : RANJIT MORE. & SMT. DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ DATE : 2nd November, 2017 P.C. : None for the Petitioner/Applicant. Stand Over to 30/11/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 322 OF 2016 Dada @ Dadasaheb B. Havaldar and Another. ..Petitioners. Versus State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. Mr. Nilesh Mohite i/b J. D. Mane for the Petitioner. Mr. F. R. Shaikh, APP for the State. Coram : Ranjit More & Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, JJ. Date : November 30, 2017 . P. C. : Learned counsel for the Applicant seeks leave to withdraw the instant application. Leave granted. Application is allowed to be withdrawn and is disposed of as such. [Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]

Order - Status 5: RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Digitally signed by RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Date: 2022.01.25 16:14:33 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 63 OF 2022 Ganesh Milind Todkari ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde for the Applicant. Mr. S.S.Pednekar, A.P.P for the Respondent-State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 21ST JANUARY, 2022 (Through Video Conferencing) P.C. : Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The applicant has impugned the order dated 29th December, 2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, by which, the learned Judge was pleased to issue non-bailable warrant as against the applicant. The applicant has also impugned another order of the same date i.e. 29th December, 2021, by which, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, rejected the applicant's application seeking anticipatory bail, on the ground, that the said application was not maintainable. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that there were sufficient grounds made out by the applicant for cancellation of the nonbailable warrant as well as for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. Learned APP vehemently opposes the application. He submitted that the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant, pursuant to the issuance of non-bailable warrant was not maintainable and as such, was rightly rejected by the Trial Court. He submits that it was always open for the applicant to file an appropriate application seeking cancellation of the non-bailable warrant, issued by the Trial Court, as against the applicant. Perused the papers. From the order dated 29th December, 2021, it appears that on the said date, despite repeated calls, neither the accused nor his Advocate is present. The learned Judge observed that the evidence cannot be recorded in the absence of the applicant/accused and as such, issued non-bailable warrant to the applicant/accused and notice to the surety. After the non-bailable warrant was issued, another application was filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail application. Learned Judge, after observing that the bail bond has been forfeited and non-bailable warrant has already been issued and hence, the application seeking anticipatory bail was not maintainable and accordingly, rejected the same. As far as the order dated 29th December, 2021 is concerned, the observation of the learned Judge in the said order that, an anticipatory bail application was not maintainable, cannot be faulted with, inasmuch as, the applicant ought to have filed an application seeking cancellation of the non-bailable warrant instead of filing an application seeking anticipatory bail. Without going into the merits, for the reasons for nonappearance of the applicant/accused on the said date i.e. on 29th December, 2021, liberty is granted to the applicant to file an appropriate application before the Trial Court seeking cancellation of the non-bailable warrant issued to the applicant. If an application is filed seeking cancellation of the nonbailable warrant issued by the Trial Court on 29th December, 2021, the learned Judge to consider the same on its own merits after hearing the parties. Leaned APP also has no objection if the applicant is permitted to file an appropriate application seeking cancellation of his non-bailable warrant before the Trial Court. The application is accordingly disposed of on the aforesaid terms. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the application and as such, all contentions of the applicant are kept open. All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 5: SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2014 ...... Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ...Applicant Versus Lata Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant Applicant present in Court None for Respondent No.1 Ms. Usha Kejariwal, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State CORAM:- REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATED :- JANUARY 31, 2014 ...... P.C. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant. By this Application, the Applicant is challenging the order dated 5th December, 2013 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 52nd Court, Kurla, Mumbai, below Exhibit 4 in C. C. No. 189/Misc/2013, by which, her application came to be rejected, wherein she had challenged the locus standi of the Respondent No.1 to file an application under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The present Applicant is the daughter-in-law of the Respondent No.1. The Respondent No. 1 has filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking reliefs under Sections 18, 21 and 22 of the said Act, and has also sought protection order apart from other reliefs. The learned Counsel for the Applicant has relied on a Judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Varsha Kapoor vs. Union of India & Ors. in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 638 of 2010, in support of his contention that the term `respondent' as defined in Section 2(q), is restricted only to adult male persons while construing the expression, "a relative of the husband or the male partner." Issue notice to the respondent No.1, returnable on 11th February, 2014. Hamdust permitted. In addition to Court notice, Applicant to serve the respondent No.1 by Advocate's notice and file an affidavit of service before the returnable date. The learned Counsel for the Applicant, on the instructions of the Applicant, who is present in Court, states that she will not visit the house of respondent No.1 or create any nuisance or threaten the respondent No.1. Ad-interim stay in terms of prayer clause (c) till 12th February, 2014. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 7: SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2014 ...... ...... Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ...Applicant Versus Lata Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. ...Respondents Ms. Maya Upadeshe h/f Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant None for Respondent No.1 Ms. Usha Kejariwal, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State CORAM:- REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATED :- FEBRUARY 12, 2014 P.C. On 31st January, 2014, notice was issued, which was made returnable on 11th February, 2014 and hamdust was permitted. However, despite the said order, the Advocate for the applicant has not supplied spare copy and hence, notice could not be issued. It is made clear that if the spare copy is not supplied within two days from today, the stay granted vide order dated 31st January, 2014 shall stand vacated. Stand over to 14th February, 2014. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 9: Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani .Applicant V/s. Lata Srichand Sakhrani & anr. .Respondents None for the Applicant Mr.Tariq Khan, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 Mrs.U.V.Kejariwal, APP, for Respondent No.2 – State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 14TH FEBRUARY, 2014 P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for respondent No.1. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1 states that he will file his Vakalatnama within one week from today. Stand over to 28-02-2014. Till then, interim relief granted vide order dated 31-01-2014 to continue. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 11: nsc. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.66 OF 2014 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Office Notes, Memorandam of appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Office Court's or Judge's orders ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Mr.Laxman P. Kanal, for the applicant. Mr.Tariq Khan, for respondent no.1. Ms.U.V.Kejariwal, APP for the State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATED : 28th February, 2014. P.C. 1. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1, states that he will file his reply in the Registry during the course of the day. He states that a copy of the reply has been served on the Counsel for the Applicant. On the next date, an endeavour shall be made to decide the matter finally at the stage of 2/2 18-apl.66.2014.doc admission. Stand over to 7th March, 2014. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 13: SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2014 ...... ...... Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ...Applicant Versus Lata Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant Mr. Tariq Khan for Respondent No.1 Ms. Usha Kejariwal, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State CORAM:- REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATED :- MARCH 7, 2014 P.C. Heard Counsel for the parties. Arguable questions are raised. Admit. Mr. Khan waives service for respondent No.1. Ms. Kejariwal, A.P.P waives service for respondent No.2-State. To be listed in the 2nd week of April, 2014 at the end of the admision Board under caption `for final hearing and disposal'. There shall be an interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c). REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani .Applicant V/s. Lata Srichand Sakhrani & anr. .Respondents Mr.Laxman P. Kanal, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr.Tariq Khan, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP, for Respondent No.2 – State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 22ND APRIL, 2014 P.C. . By consent, stand over after vacation. Till then, interim relief granted earlier to continue. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 20: Osk 935-Apl-66-2014.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani … Applicant V/s. Laat Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. … Respondents Mr.Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant. Mr.S.S. Hulke, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 17th June 2022. P.C. : . At the request of learned Advocate for Applicant, stand over to 28th June 2022. [A.S. GADKARI, J.] OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Digitally signed by OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Date: 2022.06.20 13:04:16 +0530

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APL NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani …..Applicant Vs. Lata Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. …..Respondents Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for the Applicant. Mr. R.M. Pethe APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 1st JULY, 2022. P.C.:- None for the Respondent No.1. In order to grant an opportunity to the Respondent No.1, stand over to 15th July, 2022. To be listed on supplementary board. (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ....APPLICANT V/S Laat Srichand Sakhrani And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr.Laxman Kalel for the Applicant. Mr. Tariq Khan for the Respondent No.-1. Mr. R.M.Pethe, APP for the Respondent - State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE A.S. GADKARI J DATE : 15th July, 2022 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Respondent , stand over to 22/07/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ....APPLICANT V/S Laat Srichand Sakhrani And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant Mrs. J. S. Lohokare APP-for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. G. SEWLIKAR J DATE : 22nd July, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 29/07/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ....APPLICANT V/S Laat Srichand Sakhrani And Anr ....RESPONDENT LAXMAN PRATABRAI KANAL A/W. DIVYA KANAL FOR APPLICANT YOGESH Y DABKE APP FOR STATE/RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 29th July, 2022 P.C. : The Registry to verify and place the matter before the appropriate Court. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 680 OF 2024 Alka @ Laxmi Ganpat Vinchu & Anr. …..Applicants Vs. The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. …..Respondents Mr. Priyal Sarda for the Applicants. Mr. A.I. Satpute APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 4 th JULY, 2024. P.C.:- Issue notice to Respondent No.2 returnable on 16th August, 2024. Learned Advocate for the Applicants is directed to supply spare copies of Application in the Registry within a period of one week from today, failing which the Application shall stand dismissed without further reference to this Court. Learned Advocate for the Applicants submitted that, perusal of FIR would indicate that, the allegations against the Applicants are very general in nature. That, the Respondent No. 2 has lodged the said crime after 27 years of marriage, implicating all the family members. In view thereof, till the returnable date, ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b). ( DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 680 OF 2024 Alka @ Laxmi Ganpat Vinchu and anr. … Applicants V/s. State of Maharashtra and anr. … Respondents Ms.Seema Dighe h/f Adv. Priyal Sarda, for Applicant. Mr. Ashish I. Satpute, A.P.P. for Respondent-State. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : st 21 August 2024. P.C. : Await service of Respondent No.2. Stand over to 25th September 2024. Ad-interim relief, if any granted earlier, to continue till then. ( DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. ) URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Digitally signed by URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Date: 2024.08.27 11:35:52 +0530

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 680 OF 2024 Alka @ Laxmi Ganpat Vinchu & Anr. …..Applicants Vs. The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. …..Respondents Adv. Seema S. Dighe i/by Adv. Priyal G. Sarda for the Applicants. Mr. Ashish I. Satpute APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 26 th SEPTEMBER, 2024. P.C.:- Await service of Respondent No.2. Stand over to 21st November, 2024. Ad-interim relief, if any granted earlier, to continue till the next date. ( DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.) SHARNAPPA MASHALKAR Date: 2024.10.01 13:41:57 +0530

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 680 OF 2024 Alka @ Laxmi Ganpat Vinchu And Anr ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK & HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE, JJ DATE : 21st November, 2024 P.C. : As the Court time is over, Stand Over to 08/01/2025 Ad-interim order, if any, to continue till the next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: 10:12:24 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ. DATE :- 21st JANUARY, 2025 P.C. :- KVM At the time of rising at 5.15 p.m., the matters mentioned in the chart in paragraph No.5 hereunder, could not be taken up for hearing due to paucity of time. In several of these matters, there are office objections. As such, all office objections shall be removed within two weeks. Subject to compliance of the above, ad-interim/ interim order, if any granted earlier, would continue. The affidavit in reply/rejoinder, if any, shall also be filed before the next date. Subject to the above, list these matters as under:- Serial Nos. of matters on the Board To be listed on To be listed in the category 31 to 40 04.02.2025 Fresh Admission 41 to 50 05.02.2025 Fresh Admission 52 to 58 06.02.2025 Fresh Admission 59 to 69 12.02.2025 Urgent Admission 70 to 76 13.02.2025 Urgent Admission 77 to 79 06.02.2025 Urgent Orders 80 to 100 25.02.2025 Due Admission 101 to 123 26.02.2025 Due Admission KVM (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 680 OF 2024 Alka @ Laxmi Ganpat Vinchu And Anr ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT PRIYAL G SARDA CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK, JJ DATE : 12th February, 2025 P.C. : As the Court time is over,Stand Over to 03/04/2025 Ad-interim order,if any, to continue till the next date ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CORAM:- SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M.MODAK, JJ. DATE:- 03rd April,2025 P.C. :- As the Court time is over, the balance board could not be taken up. Matter stand over to the dates mentioned in the chart below. Serial number of matter on board To be listed on Sr. No. 31 to 37, 39 to 40, 42 to 45 04/07/2025 Sr. No. 47 to 52, 54 to 57 07/07/2025 Sr. No. 59, 61 to 75 08/07/2025 Sr. No. 76 to 89, 91 to 95 09/07/2025 Sr. No.96,97,99,101 to 104 & 106 10/07/2025 Sr. No.108 to 115, 118 to 120, 123 & 125 11/07/2025 Sr. No. 126 to 133, 135 to 138 & 140 14/07/2025 Sr. No. 141 to 144, 146 to 158 15/07/2025 Ad-interim order,if any, to continue till the next date. (S.M.MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Seema .

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Cri.Application No.64 of 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers & Anr. …… Applicants. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …... Respondents. --- Mr Jatin Karia (Shah) a/w Ms Dipti J Karia a/w Ms Snehanlata Munj a/w Ms Shraddha Kamble a/w Ms Preeti SG for the applicants. Dr Ashwini A Takalkar, APP for respondent No.1/State. --- Coram : R.N.Laddha, J. Date : 21 January 2025. P.C. : Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By a judgment and order dated 12.09.2024, the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, 70th Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai, in CC No.7002519/SS/2018, convicted applicant No.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 138 read with 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 ('NI Act'). Applicant No.2 was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and pay fine of Rs.3,00,000/- Page No. 1 of 3 21 January 2025 within two months, with default stipulations. Aggrieved, the applicants filed a criminal appeal bearing No.648 of 2024 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai, along with a miscellaneous application bearing No.2255 of 2024 for suspension of the sentence. By an order dated 19.11.2024, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai, suspended the sentence imposed subject to the payment of 50% of the fine/compensation within 60 days. Dissatisfied, the applicants have approached this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The learned Counsel representing the applicants submits that the requirement to deposit 50% of the amount set by the Additional Sessions Judge is excessive and disproportionate, without any justification. The learned Counsel further submits that the applicants are in a financial difficulty and to show their bonafides, they are ready to deposit 20% instead of 50% of the fine/ compensation amount awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge within three weeks from today with the trial Court. Page No. 2 of 3 21 January 2025 Considering the material on record and the arguments advanced across the Bar, the sentence shall be suspended in the ad-interim subject to the applicants depositing 20% of the fine amount before the trial Court within three weeks from the date of uploading of this order. Issue notice to respondent No.2. Stand over to 24 March 2025. [ R. N. Laddha,J. ] Page No. 3 of 3 21 January 2025

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Digitally signed by CHITRA SONAWANE Date: 2025.03.24 16:36:48 +0530 CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Cri.Application No.62 of 2025 With Cri.Application No.63 of 2025 With Cri.Application No.64 of 2025 With Cri.Application No.65 of 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers & Anr. …… Applicants. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …... Respondents. Mr Jatin P Karia (Shah) a/w Ms Snehankita M Munj and Ms Shraddha Kamble for the applicants. Ms Dr AA Takalkar, APP for respondent/State in APL/63/2025 and APL/65/2025. Mr VN Sagare, APP for State in APL/62/2025. Mr PH Gaikwad, APP for State in APL/64/2025. Mr MA Bastiri for respondent No.2. Coram : R.N.Laddha, J. Date : 24 March 2025. P.C. : The applicants to provide the copies of these applications to the learned Counsel for respondent No.2. Interim relief granted earlier shall continue to operate Page No. 1 of 2 24 March 2025 Chitra Sonawane 45-APL-62-2025.doc till the next date. Stand over to 13 June 2025. [ R. N. Laddha,J. ] Page No. 2 of 2 24 March 2025

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 62 OF 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers And Anr ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 63 OF 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers And Anr ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 64 OF 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers And Anr APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 65 OF 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers And Anr ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 17th June, 2025 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 01/07/2025. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 62 OF 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers And Anr ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 63 OF 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers And Anr ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 64 OF 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers And Anr APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 65 OF 2025 Samarth Krupa Developers And Anr ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK J DATE : 8th July, 2025 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 29/07/2025. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )