All Civil Miscellaneous Application

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.300 OF 2017 Devila K. Shah … Applicant V/s. Faaiz Anwar Qureshi & Anr. … Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.303 OF 2017 Manashi K. Shah … Applicant V/s. Faaiz Anwar Qureshi & Anr. … Respondents Mr. P.V. Dubey a/w. Bindu Gupta for the Applicant. Mr. A.R. Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 28th MARCH 2018 P.C.: Issue notice to Respondent No.1, returnable after four weeks. In addition to Court notice, the applicant is permitted to serve Respondent No.1 by way of private notice and to file an affidavit of service after Respondent No.1 is duly served. Stand over to 25.04.2018. (A.S.GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 9: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 303 OF 2017 Mansi K.Shah ..Applicant Vs Faaiz Anwar Qureshi & Anr. .. Respondents Mr. Princekumar Dubey for applicant. Mr. Devang Lakhotia i/b Juris Consillis for respondent No.1. Mr. V.V. Gangurde, APP for State. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 25th APRIL 2018. P.C.: 1] This is an application for condonation of delay of 69 days in filing the application for leave to file appeal. 2] Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Counsel for the respondent No.1. 3] The learned Counsel for the respondent No.1 vehemently opposed the application. However, for the reasons stated in the application and in the interest of justice, the delay is condoned and the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). (A.S.GADKARI, J.) 1/1

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 244 OF 2008 Dr. Gyanendra S.N. Singh .. Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.K.S. Patil for the applicant. Mrs.M.M. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 30TH JANUARY 2008 P.C. : Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with the offence registered with Jogeshwari Police Station, Mumbai under C.R. No.196/2007 punishable under section 498-A, 323, 506, 504, 379, 377 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Earlier application made by the applicant to the Sessions Court (Application No.24/2008) for bail has been rejected by an order dated 18th January 2008. The complainant is the wife of Arvind Pawar. The applicant is a friend of Arvind Pawar. In the FIR lodged by the complainant on 5th November 2007, she alleged that the complainant and her husband lived together for 5-6 months after the marriage. Thereafter there were quarrels between them. Hence she left the house. Thereafter her husband has been harassing her and on 1st October 2007 Arvind along with his three friends including the present applicant came to her house, assaulted her and took away gold mangalsutra weighing about 1 tola and 2 gold bangles weighing about 2 1/2 tolas. The complainant further alleges that in the past her husband had unnatural intercourse with her though she had not informed this to anyone. There is no allegation that the applicant is in any way concerned with the act of unnatural intercourse allegedly committed by the husband. In my view, the learned Sessions Judge has erred in assuming that the present applicant is also a party to the unnatural offence punishable under section 379 of the I.P.C. The only allegation against the applicant is that he accompanied the husband of the complainant on 1st October 2007 when she was allegedly robbed of one gold mangalsutra and 2 gold bangles. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. There is no independent witness to the incident. There is a delay of more than a month in lodging the FIR after the alleged robbing. In the circumstances, the applicant is entitled to bail. Hence, I pass the following order:- ORDER In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the offence mentioned above, he shall be released on bail on executing personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount subject to the condition that the applicant shall not make any contact with the complainant and shall not in any way make any inducement or threat to any of the prosecution witnesses and shall attend the concerned police station as and when summoned by the police for the purpose of interrogation/ investigation. This order shall come to an end after the charge sheet is filed whereupon the applicant, if he so desires, may apply for regular bail before the regular court. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 244 OF 2008 Shri Abdul Rahim Tantray. ... Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent. S.V.Kotwal i/b. S.S.Bhandary for the applicant. Ms.M.H.Mhatre, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 2nd May 2008. P.C.: ---- . Heard. Perused record. The relaxation sought to be prayed by the applicant was already granted under order dated 1st February, 2008. The applicant has availed the benefit of that order. There cannot be successive relaxation in every alternate month. Application is, therefore, rejected. JUDGE

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3719 OF 2003 IN CRIMINAL REVN. APPLICATION NO. 360 OF 2003 Mr. Rajesh Kisanchand Agarwal. ... Applicant. V/s. Vinay Ramchandra Kulkarni and Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. S.R. Agarkar for the Applicant. Ms. U.V. Kejriwal, APP for the State. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. OCTOBER 08, 2014. P.C. :- Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that Criminal Revision Application No.360 of 2003 has been disposed of and consequently, the present Application is rendered infructuous. Accordingly, Criminal Application No.3719 of 2003 is dismissed as infructuous. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2774 OF 2006 Samar Khadas & ors ..Petitioners V/s. The Poisar-Kandivli Maharashtra State Police Employee's CHS Ltd & ors .Respondents Mr.S.R.Chitnis, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Vinayak Shetye i.b Ms.P.Kamani for the Petitioners. Mr.Vishwajeet Kapse for Respondentos. 1 to 3. Coram : R.S.Mohite,J Date : 28.11.2007 PC The respondent nos. 1 to 3 have filed private criminal complaint against the present petitioners alleging an offence punishable under sections 500, 501 and 502 read with section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner nos. 1 to 3 are all employees working with "Loksatta" which is run by the Indian Express group of newspapers which is applicant no.4. It appears that at the behest of the respondent no.4 who has now expired some articles were published in Loksatta. The present respondent nos. 1 to 3 thought that the said articles were defamatory and hence a criminal complaint came to be filed. Therefore, Criminal Case No. 632//SS/2005 came to be filed in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 24th Court, Borivali, Mumbai. The Magistrate has issued process in the said complaint. In the meanwhile, the present respondent no. 4 who was also accused no.1 in the complaint has expired. The complainant and the remaining accused have now decided to settle their dispute and compound the offences. Accordingly, minutes of order dated 28th November, 2007 signed by the both the advocates as well as by the parties is tendered across the bar today and the same is marked X for identification. The Application as well as the complaint is disposed of in terms of the minutes of order. (R.S.Mohite,J)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 229 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2356 OF 2005 Chetan Ashokkumar Patil . ......Applicants versus State of Maharashtra & ors....... Respondant. None for the Applicant Mrs. A.S. Pai APP for State. CORAM: S. B. MHASE & R. V. MORE, JJ. DATED: 14th NOVEMBER, 2008. P.C.: Place the matter before the Bench presided over by B.H. Marlapalle & J.H. Bhatia, JJ. since it is a matter of recalling of the order passed by the same Bench. (R.V. MORE, J.) (S. B. MHASE, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE CRIMINAL HIGH APPELLATE CO LATE APPLIC COURT APPLICATION OF NO. JUDICATURE 229 AT OF BOMBAY JURISDICTION 2008 CRI CRIMINAL WRIT [ IN PETITION ON NO. 2356 OF 2005 Chetan Ashokkumar Patil Applicant Vs. S. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. Respondents None Mr. Mr. A.S. for Gadkari, M.K. Kocharekar APP the for for respondent respondent applicant. no.1-State. no.2. CORAM: B.H. J.H. MARLAPALLE BHATIA, & JJ. Date : : April 13, 2009. P.C.: Ν None for the applicant. e applica ant. . Mr. Gadkari the learned APP states that charge-sheet heet has been filed on 10/12/2003 bearing No. 127 of 2003 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangli. He seek s time to f file affida Sangli. He seeks time to file affidavit of the I.O. I.O. or his successor. Time granted. . Stand over for one week. (J.H. Bhatia,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH APPELLATE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY JURISDICTION CRIMINAL L Al APPLICATION IN NO. 229 OF 2008 ( CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION N N NO. 2356 OF 2005 Chetan Ashokkumar Patil Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. d Anr. Respondents Mr. Mr. Umesh A.S. Gadkari, Mankapure for for respondent nt applicant. no.1-State. CORAM: J.H. B.H. MARLAPALLE BHATIA, Date : April 20, 2009. P.C.: 1. We have heard Mr. Mankapure the learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Gadkari, the learned Λ DD has n aced be fore us the affidavit of Shri Hamid APP, has placed before us the affidavit of Shri Hamid Ismail Shaikh, Police Head Constable, who was the I.O. in C.R. No. 192 of 2003 registered with the Vishrambag Police Station at Sangli. 2. 2. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2356 of 2005 was disposed off with the observations that the petitioner's remedy was before the Sessions ns Court to challenge the order passed under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. However, it has been pointed out in this application that the Advocate, who appeared before us (Shri Sandeep Kume) was not familiar with the facts of the case and had erroneously made the statement when the petition was called out for hearing. The court proceeded on the basis that it was a private complaint registered as S.C.C. No. 2054 of 2003. This application states that an F.I.R. was lodged with the Police Station and the complaint is, therefore, at the instance of the State. The record supports these contentions and we, therefore, heard Mr. Mankapure afresh on the merits of Writ Petition No. 2356 of 2005. 3.The affidavit filed by the I.O. today states that on completion of investigation, charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Section 509 of IPC came to be filed on 10/12/2003 i.e. much before the petition was filed before us. This factum of filing of the charge-sheet earlier has not reflected in the petition memo and the petitioner prayed for quashing of the F.I.R. Once the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent court on investigation by the police, the trial court will have to proceed with the complaint on its own merits and a petition to quash :2: the F.I.R. need not be entertained. Mr. Mankapure, therefore, sought leave to withdraw the application so as to approach the trial court with appropriate application. 4.Hence, leave granted and the application is disposed as withdrawn with liberty as is available in law. (J.H. Bhatia,J.) (B.H. Marlapalle,J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.38 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1750 OF 2006 State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Applicants Vs. Mr. Ramesh Vaja Rabari & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. D.S. Mhaispurkar, A.P.P. for the applicants-State. None for the respondents. CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & D. B. BHOSALE, JJ. DATED : 12TH APRIL, 2007. P.C.: - Heard Mr. Mhaispurkar, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the applicants. As a last chance, time to complete the investigation is extended by three weeks from today i.e. till 3/5/2007. Criminal application is disposed of. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [D. B. BHOSALE, J.]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4246 OF 2005 Pandurang Narayan Wakase. Applicant. Versus. The State of Maharashtra. Respondent. Shri V.V.Purwant for the Applicant. Shri R.Y.Mirza, A.P.P.for the Respondent. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATED : 22nd July, 2005. P.C.: Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant and the learned A.P.P. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that there was absolutely no intention on the part of the Applicant to kill the victim and in fact none of the injuries are on the vital parts of the body of the victim. The learned A.P.P. pointed out the material against the Applicant. The F.I.R. discloses that when the victim was at the place of incident, the Applicant went back to his house and brought a sickle and assaulted the victim. The medical report indicates that three fingers of the victim were chopped of and in fact there was traumatic amputation of three fingers. There is a stab wound on the right eye. It is obvious that the attempt made by the Applicant is deliberate as according to the prosecution story he went back to his house and brought the sickle. Considering the gravity of the offence it is difficult to take a different view than the view taken by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Hence the Application is rejected. The trial is expedited and the same should be concluded by treating it as a High Court expedited trial. Judge.

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.2440 OF 2008 Imran Mohd.Aziz Shaikh ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.V.T.Tulpule senior counsel for Applicant Ms.A.T.Jhaveri APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : AUGUST 4, 2008 P.C. Heard the learned senior counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The applicant is seeking bail in CR No.228 of 2007 of Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur. The said case is mainly under Section 376 of IPC. The learned counsel for the applicant stated that Ahetashyam Rafique Ahmed Momin has been granted bail by this Court and the case of the applicant is similar to that of the co-accused. This statement is not controverted by the prosecution, hence, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. The applicant-Imran Mohd.Aziz Shaikh to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.twenty five thousand only) with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. The applicant to report to Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur once in a month till conclusion of the trial. Application is disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4846 OF 2005 ...................................................... Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or Judge's orders or directions and orders Registrar's orders ...................................................... Law Global for the Applicant. Ms S.D.Shinde, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1. Mr. Sanjay Khemka, Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATE : AUGUST 05, 2005. P.C.: 1. The Respondent No.2 appearing in person mentioned this matter at 02.00 p.m. for adjournment. The prayer made by the Respondent No.2 appearing in person was opposed by the Advocate for the Applicant on the ground that the Applicant desires to obtain ad-interim relief. None appears for the Applicant when the Application is called out. Dismissed for default. JUDGE

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4797 OF 2005 Sanjay Sitaram Khemka .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4846 OF 2005 Sampatraj Adania .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr.S.S.Khemka, applicant in person in CA No.4797/05 and respondent no.2 in person in CA No.4846/05. Mr.Subhash Jha i/b Law Global for respondent no.3 in CA No.4797/05 and for the applicant. in CA No.4846/05. Mr.R.Y.Mirza A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 3RD AUGUST, 2006 P.C.: . Heard Sanjay Khemka in person and Mr.Subhash Jha, learned counsel for respondent-Sampatraj Adania and Mr.R.Y.Mirza learned A.P.P. for the State. Both the applications challenge one and the same order dated 15.7.2005 passed on the application Nos.162/N/2005 and 127/N/2005 filed under section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I am informed that application bearing No.121/N/2005 field by Mr.Sanjay Khemka on 3.3.2005 under section 451 was also pending at the relevant time. I heard the applicant - Sanjay Khemka in both the applications in person and Mr.Jha for the respondent-Sampatraj Adania. Both, the applicant-Khemka and Mr.Jha have fairly stated that I need not record the reasons for setting aside the order dated 15.7.2005 passed on the application nos.162/N/2005 and 127/N/2005 and the parties would be satisfied by the order that I proposed to pass. Hence the following order: (a) The order dated 15.7.2005 passed below application nos.127/N/2005 and 162/N/2005 by the Special Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri is quashed and set aside. Both the applications stand restored to file. (b) The learned Magistrate shall hear and decide, application nos.127/N/2005 and 162/N/2005 with the application of Sanjay Khemka bearing No.121/N/2005 afresh as expeditiously as possible and preferrably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The learned Magistrate may also hear application/s, if any, under section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure alongwith the aforesaid 2 applications. The learned Magistrate shall give hearing to all the concerned parties while passing the order on the aforesaid applications for return of property under section 451 of the Code and decide all the applications on merits in accordance with law. . With these directions the applications are disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)