All Cases

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1834 OF 2009 Shri Aiyaz Mamoodmiya Rais : Petitioner (Orig.Accused) V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents ... Mr.S.D. Patil with Mr.Shivraj R. Patil for the petitioner. Mr.D.P.Adsule, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. ... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : JULY 20, 2009. P.C.: Mentioned. Not on board. Issue notice before admission, returnable in two weeks. By way of ad-interim relief, the interim bail granted by the trial Court on 15.6.2009 shall be extended till then. S.A. BOBDE, J.

Order - Status 2: KJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (ST) NO.16055 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4870 OF 2011 Chare Education Society & Anr. )....Petitioners V/s. Abasaheb Suryavanshi & Ors. )....Respondents Mr.S.G.Kudle for the petitioners. CORAM : S.A.BOBDE & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. D ATE : 29th JUNE, 2012. P.C. :- 1 Issue notice to the respondents returnable on 13.7.2012. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J) (S.A.BOBDE,J)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION 249/2012 IN W.P.4870/2011 Chare Education Society & Anr. Petitioners Vs. Abasaheb Suryavanshi & Ors. Respondents Mr.S.G.Kudale for petitioners Mr.Vijay Killedar for Res.3 Mr.A.I.Patel,AGP for Res.4 CORAM- S.A.BOBDE AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE- 1st AUGUST,2012. P.C. According to Mr.Kudale respondent nos.1 and 2 have been served on 13/7/2012, however, none appears. In the circumstances the respondents are directed to remain personally present in the Court on 16/8/2012. Copy of this order shall be served upon the respondents by the petitioner by Humdust. (Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.) (S.A.Bobde,J.) srs

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.249 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4870 OF 2011 Chare Education Society and another … Petitioners Vs. Abasaheb Suryavanshi & others … Respondents Mr. S. G. Kudle for Petitioners. Mr. Rupesh K. Bobade for Contempnor Nos.1 and 2. Ms S. S. Bhende, AGP for Respondent No.4. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE & R. G. KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 27TH SEPTEMBER, 2012 P.C.: It is surprising that respondent Nos.1 and 2 - contempnors are not present in the Court inspite of service of the notice from this Court. They are directed to remain present on 3rd October 2012. Stand over to 3rd October 2012. (R. G. KETKAR, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.249 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4870 OF 2011 Chare Education Society and another … Petitioners Vs. Abasaheb Suryavanshi and others … Respondents Mr. S. G. Kudle for Petitioners. Mr. Rupesh Bobade for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Vijay Killedar for Respondent No.3. Mr. C. R. Sonawane, AGP for Respondent No.4. CORAM : V. M. KANADE & R. G. KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 3RD OCTOBER, 2012 P.C.: Despite two orders being passed by this Court directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to remain present, today respondent No.1 has remained absent. Mr. Bobade, learned Counsel for respondent No.1 seeks one last chance. As and by way of last chance, stand over to 10th October 012. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to remain present on the next date of hearing, failing which, appropriate steps will be taken. (R. G. KETKAR, J.) (V. M. KANADE, J.)

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.249 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4870 OF 2011 Chare Education Society & Anr. …Petitioners V/s. Abasaheb Suryavanshi & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.S.G. Kudle for the Petitioners. Mr.A.I. Patel, A.G.P. for the State - Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr.Vijay Killedar for Respondent No.3. Mr.Rupesh K. Bobde for Respondent No.4. Mr.Amit Shete for Respondent No.5. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE : 22ND JANUARY, 2013. P.C. :- In view of the order passed in Writ Petition No.4870 of 2011, there is no case for contempt. There is nothing to indicate that the school was not shifted to the location indicated in the order dated 22.02.2012. The contempt petition is, therefore, dismissed. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (S.J. VAZIFDAR, J.)

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 136 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's Memoranda of Coram, orders appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders ------------------------------------------------------ Mr. D.R. Tiwari for appellant-wife. Mr. S.C. Thatte for respondent-husband. CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE, & D.B. BHOSALE,JJ. 18/07/2008. P.C.: . Heard Mr. Tiwari the learned counsel for the appellant-wife. . Admit. . Mr. Thatte waives service for the respondent-husband. . Appeal to be heard with FCA No. 66 of 2008. (D.B. Bhosale,J.) (B.H.Marlapalle,J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPLICATION NO.654 OF 2015 IN APPEAL ST.NO.599 OF 2015 Vinod Ramesh Pimple Applicant -Versus State of Maharashtra Respondent Mrs. Savita Prabhune for applicant Mrs. P.P.Bhosale, APP for State CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATE : 24th August 2015 P.C. 1] Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant on this application for condonation of delay of 30 days, in filing the appeal challenging the conviction for the offences under section 304 part II of IPC and also under section 323 and 325 of IPC. 2] Reportedly, the applicant is in jail. As such, the delay in preferring the appeal is condoned. Application is allowed. 3] Appeal is admitted. 4] Hearing of the application for bail/ suspension of sentence is S.O. for two weeks. ( A.R.JOSHI, J.)

Order - Status 10: Ashokkumar Rogiprasad Sahani .. Applicant -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. A. B. Tajane, for the Applicant. Mrs P. P. Shinde, APP for the respondent State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 7th October, 2010 P.C. This is an application for bail by accused in Crime No.7 of 2010, registered at Saswad Police Station, Pune, for the offence punishable under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant was arrested in connection with murder of one Keshav Bhagat. The allegations are that Keshav used to press the applicant to perform unnatural intercourse with the applicant and the applicant ultimately killed the victim. Investigation in the matter initially proceeded in different direction on account of recitals in F.I.R. But ultimately since the applicant used victim's mobile phone, applicant was traced out. In any case, recovery of mobile phone from the applicant on the day of his arrest which is linked to the offence would have to be considered by the Trial Judge at the trial. The application is, therefore, rejected. Considering the age of the applicant and the fact that he is in jail for 4 to 5months, learned Judge shall expedite the hearing of the case and shall of the same as early as possible and preferably within one year. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3158 OF 2010 Ashokkumar Rogiprasad Sahani ..Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Ms Yogita Mayekar i/b.Mr.A.B.Tajane, Advocate, for the Applicant Mrs.P.P.Shinde, APP, for the Respondent - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 22ND OCTOBER, 2010 P.C. . A precipe has been filed by the applicant for Speaking to the Minutes of the Order dated 7th October, 2010. On page No.2 in the second line from the bottom after the word shall the word dispose of should be typed. Office to issue a certified copy accordingly. The precipe for Speaking to the Minutes of the Order is accordingly disposed of. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J/CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A. S. OKA AND REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ. DATED : 22nd JUNE, 2015 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 183 to 189, 191, 197, 209, 211, 217, 220 to 228, 251 (A.S) 02/07/2015 192 (A.S), 231, 232, 243, 276 (O.S) 03/07/2015 195 (O.S.) 19/08/2015 198, 229 (A.S) 16/07/2015 199, 200, 230 (A.S) 30/07/2015 201 to 204 (A.S.) 03/08/2015 205, 206, 249 (A.S.) 04/08/2015 207 (O.S.) 03/09/2015 208 (O.S.) 16/09/2015 210, 212 (O.S.) 30/09/2015 213 to 216, 219 (O.S.) 05/10/2015 233 to 235 (O.S.) 06/10/2015 236, 252 to 256 (O.S.) 07/10/2015 237 (A.S.) 06/08/2015 239 (A.S.) 13/07/2015 240, 242, 282, 286 (O.S.) 06/07/2015 241 (A.S.) 07/08/2015 244, 273 (A.S.) 10/08/2015 245, 246, 274 (O.S.) 07/07/2015 Sr. Nos. C.M.I.S. Date 247, 257, 259 to 268, 271, 272, 280, 281, 283, 284, 295, 299 to 304 (A.S) 24/07/2015 248, 275 (O.S.) 08/07/2015 258, 285, 287, 288 (O.S.) 09/10/2015 269, 270 (A.S.) 11/08/2015 277, 278 (O.S.) 09/07/2015 279 (A.S.) 23/07/2015 289 to 291 (O.S) 13/10/2015 292 to 294, 296 to 298 (O.S) 14/10/2015 305 to 308, 311, 316 (A.S) 27/07/2015 313 (A.S) 28/07/2015 314, 315 (A.S) 29/07/2015 317 (A.S) 30/07/2015 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. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.) (A. S. OKA, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S. OKA & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ. DATE : JULY 2, 2015 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 55 05/10/2015 56 to 63, 84, 85, 91, 94, 95, 97, 98, 903, 905 30/07/2015 64 12/08/2015 65 to 75, 96 21/08/2015 76(OS), 81 13/07/2015 77(OS) 07/10/2015 78(OS) 14/10/2015 79, 82, 83, 88, 89, 90, 93(OS) 16/11/2015 80(OS) 20/07/2015 86(OS) 14/07/2015 87(OS) 22/07/2015 92(OS) 24/07/2015 901 16/07/2015 904 31/07/2015 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.

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL/CRIMINAL JURISDICTION / O.O.C.J. COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S. OKA, AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 21st AUGUST, 2015 P.C. . The following matters on Balance Board / Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. The matters will appear on the dates as may be fixed by C.M.I.S. Sr. No. C.M.I.S Date 67 03/09/2015 68 05/10/2015 69, 70 06/10/2015 71 08/10/2015 72 16/10/2015 73 17/10/2015 74, 75, 76 27/10/2015 77, 78 28/10/2015 79 20/11/2015 80, 89, 90, 91, 92 23/11/2015 81 13/10/2015 82, 84, 85 01/09/2015 83, 87, 88, 123, 124, 125, 139, 140 (O.S.) 14/12/2015 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98 24/11/2015 99, 100 26/11/2015 101 to 120 30/11/2015 121, 133, 134, 135, 136, 138, 142, 143, 144, 148, 149, 150, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 158, 160, 162, 163, 164, 902 01/12/2015 126 (Criminal) 14/10/2015 127 (O.S.) 11/09/2015 128 (O.S.) 14/09/2015 129, 130, 131, 132, 145, 146, 147, 151, 157, 159, 161 15/10/2015 137 (O.S.) 15/09/2015 141 (O.S.) 15/12/2015 . If any adinterim relief or interim relief in the aforesaid matters is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the dates which are fixed under this order. If any adinterim or interim order is to operate till further orders, such orders shall remain unaffected. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (A.S. OKA, J.)

Order - Status 11: Shephali IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE AND ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER FOR BALANCE BOARD OF DAILY BOARD DATED 23RD NOVEMBER 2015 CORAM: A.S. OKA & G.S. PATEL, JJ. DATED: 23rd November 2015 PC:- The following matters on Balance Board / Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. The matters will appear on the dates as may be fixed by C.M.I.S. Sr. Nos. C.M.I.S. Date Sr. Nos. C.M.I.S. Date 54, 56, 57, 58, 61 03/12/15 55 (O.S.), 70 23/03/16 59 (O.S.), 71 to 80, 87 (O.S.), 106, 111, 114 29/03/16 60, 85, 86, 88, 89 (O.S.) 11/04/16 62, 64, 65, 81 (O.S.) 16/12/15 63 20/01/16 66 to 69 22/03/16 82, 83, 84 (O.S.) 17/12/15 90 to 98, 100, 105, 107 to 110, 113 25/01/16 99, 104 (O.S.) 05/12/15 101, 102, 103 (O.S.) 12/04/16 112 (O.S. 07/12/15 116, 117 14/01/16 If in any of the above matters, ad-interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If the ad-interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. (G. S. PATEL, J.) (A.S. OKA, J.)

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S. OKA & G.S.PATEL, JJ. DATE : DECEMBER 16, 2015 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 Sr. Nos. C.M.I.S. Date 27 21­03­2016 34, 35, 37, 46 to 06­05­2016 61 28 02­05­2016 39, 40, 41 06­01­2016 29 05­05­2016 42 (OS) 15­06­2016 30 (OS) 15­02­2016 43, 44, 75, 76, 77, 79 (OS) 28­06­2016 31 09­03­2016 45, 74 22­02­2016 32, 36, 38 10­03­2016 62 to 72, 78, 80 to 85 06­06­2016 33 08­02­2016 73 (OS) 27­01­2016 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. ( G.S.PATEL, J ) (A.S. OKA, J ) ssp

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4182 OF 2015 Mohan Somla Pagi … Petitioner Versus The Administrator, Union Territory of Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Ors. … Respondents Ms. Dipti Kuber i/by Devmani Shukla for the petitioner. None for the respondents. CORAM : SHANTANU KEMKAR & MAKARAND KARNIK, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 19, 2016. P.C. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have not taken any action on the petitioner's complaint dated 8.1.2015 Exh.A in regard to the raising of the illegal construction on the land bearing S. No. 244, located at Silvasa, Dadra Nagar Haveli. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we dispose of this petition by directing the respondents to examine the petitioner's complaint and take appropriate action in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as also to the concerned affected persons. Let the action as aforesaid be taken as expeditiously as possible but not latter than four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The Petitioner to give copy of the complaint dated 8.1.2015 to the respondents along with the copy of this order. With the aforesaid directions, petition is disposed of. (MAKARAND KARNIK, J.) (SHANTANU KEMKAR, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1144 OF 2019 Prakash Siddhnath Shukla & Ors. Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra Respondent Ms. Ameeta Kuttikrishnan i/b Mr. Chinmay P. Gaonkar for the Applicants. Mr. J.P. Yagnik, A.P.P. for Respondent – State. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATED : 24th MAY, 2019. (VACATION COURT) P.C. : 1 I have perused the F.I.R. There are allegations in the F.I.R. that applicants have tendered forged documents to stake claim to their right in a Slum Rehabilitation Project. Prima facie there is nothing to show that the documents were genuine. However, the investigation is still in progress. Learned Counsel for the applicant seeks time to give details of the documents which were supplied by the applicants to the authorities. Time as prayed for is granted. 2 Stand over to 12.06.2019. (SARANG V. KOTWAL J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1144 OF 2019 Prakash Siddhnath Shukla And Ors Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra Respondent MS.Ameeta Kuttikrishnan i/by Chinmay P Gaonkar For Applicant V.V.Gangurde App for state. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 13th June, 2019 P.C. : Stand over to 17/06/2019 UNDER THE CAPTION OF URGENT CIRCULATIONS. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1144 OF 2019 Prakash Siddhnath Shukla And Ors Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra Respondent Ms. Ameeta kuttikrishanan i/b.Mr Chinmay P Gaonkar For Applicant. V.V.Gangurde App for state. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 17th June, 2019 P.C. : At the request of Applicant ,stand over to 19/06/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1144 OF 2019 Prakash Siddhnath Shukla & ors. .Applicants Vs. P.C. The State of Mahrashtra .Respondent Ms Ameeta Kuttikrishnan i/b. Mr. C. P. Gaonkar, Advocate, for the Applicants Mr. S. S. Hulke, APP, for the Respondent – State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 19.06.2019 . Heard learned counsel for the parties. By this Application, the Applicants seek prearrest bail in connection with C. R. No. 8 of 2017 registered with the Andheri Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Without going into the merits of the allegation made by the Complainant, learned counsel for the Applicants relies on the Judgment of this Court in W. P. No. 924 of 2016 with Cri. Application No. 486 of 2016 ( Sayyed Anwar Ahmed & anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & anr. ) dated 27th & 28th February, 2017, to show that the complaint at the behest of the Complainant is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the Applicants in particular, relies on para 28 of the said Judgment, wherein it is stated that in cases of SRA Schemes, in view of the law laid down in Shailesh Gandhi Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, an aggrieved party must first approach the High Power Committee; and if the High Power Committee finds that there is an element of criminality or in cases of impersonation etc, it would ensure that the investigation is handed over to the appropriate agency. It is further stated that if a Complainant has any grievance about the names included in Annexure – II, he can always approach the High Power Committee and that the said Committee can direct setting of criminal law in motion, if it finds criminality in it. Learned counsel in view of the said decision submits that the complaint filed by the Complainant before the learned JMFC, pursuant to which an order under Section 156(3) came to be passed and the aforesaid C. R. came to be registered is untenable. Learned APP does not dispute the aforesaid. In the facts, custodial interrogation of the Applicants is not warranted. Accordingly, the Application is allowed and the Applicants are granted prearrest bail on the following terms & conditions : O R D E R (i) In the event of arrest, the Applicants be enlarged on bail, on executing P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/ each with one or two sureties in the like amount; (ii) The Applicants shall report to the investigating officer of the concerned police station as & when called for by the investigating officer. The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.574 OF 2021 Farooq Sattar Dalvi and anr. .. Appellants vs. State of Maharashtra and anr. .. Respondents ---------------- Mr. R.S. Deshpande a/w Mr. Vijay S. Thakur for the Appellants. Mr. N.B. Patil, APP for the State. Mr. Vinayak Narale, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ambernath Division, Thane City present. CORAM : M.S.KARNIK, J. DATE : AUGUST 12, 2021 P.C. Heard learned counsel for the Appellants. He seeks leave to amend so as to implead the complainant as a party Respondent. Leave to amend. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. The ofence is registered against the Appellants in respect of C.R. No.I-152 of 2021 registered with Hill Line Police Station, Thane for the ofences punishable under Section 354-D of Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) and Section 3(1)(R), 3(1)(W) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ('the said Act' for short) on the basis of FIR given by the complainant-Ms. Apeksha Dalvi. 14.APEAL.574-21.doc Ms. Apeksha Dalvi is a President of RPI (Women Wing) of Thane District. The Appellant No.1 is the President of RPI Maharashtra State and the Appellant No.2 is the President of RPI Shahpur Taluka. It is the case of the Appellant No.1 that he being a Vice President of RPI Maharashtra appointed one lady as a President of Shahpur Taluka RPI, without consulting the complainant. The complainant was therefore annoyed and hence the submission of Appellant that a false case is registered against them. It is alleged that the Appellant No.1 has posted some messages in a whatsapp group of RPI Thane District which are derogatory in nature and insulting. Even the Appellant No.2 has posted some messages on the whatsapp group which afects the dignity and honour of the complainant and hence the ofence is registered. The trial Court rejected the application for bail. It is contended by learned counsel for the Applicants that the basic ingredients of ofence under Section 3(1)(R) of the said Act are not made out. The Appellant No.2-Jayvant Bhagawan Thorat belongs to the Scheduled Caste. The trial Court therefore held that so far as the ofence under the said Act alleged against Jayvant is concerned, the same may not be attracted in his case. As against the Appellant No.1-Farooq Sattar Dalvi, the trial Court held that prima facie Section 3(1)(R) of the said Act would be attracted. As against both the Appellants, trial Court observed that Section 354(D) of IPC will be applicable. 14.APEAL.574-21.doc It is the contention of learned counsel for the Appellants that all insults or intimidations to a person will not be an ofence under the Act unless such insult or intimidation is on account of victim belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The ofence under Section 3(1)(R) of the said Act would indicate the ingredient of intentional insult and intimidation must be with an intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe. It is the contention of learned counsel for the Appellants that the whatsapp messages posted were not with the object of humiliating any member of the Scheduled Caste or the Scheduled Tribe. According to him, the Appellants as well as the complainant happen to be members are of the RPI Political party. Assuming the language used in the posts on whatsapp is derogatory, it cannot be said to have been posted with an intent to humiliate the member of the Scheduled Caste or the Scheduled Tribe. It is just that the complainant was annoyed with the Appellants taking some decisions without consulting her which led to the exchange of the messages. The intent therefore is absent. Learned APP for the State submitted that the Appellants have not co-operated with the investigation and the bar of Section 18 of the said Act will be attracted in the present case. He submitted that for the reasons mentioned by the Appellate Court, this is not a ft case for grant of anticipatory bail. 3 Of 4 Learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that they are willing to co-operate with the investigation but as there is no protection in their favour, they apprehend that they will be arrested forthwith. That was the only reason according to them that they did not present themselves before the Investigating Ofcer. Prima facie I fnd substance in the contention of the Appellants that the ofence under Section 3(1)(R) is not made out. Issue notice to the complainant, returnable on 24.08.2021. In addition to the Court's notice, the Investigating Ofcer to inform the complainant about the next date of hearing. The Appellants in my opinion deserve to be granted interim protection. In the event the Appellants are arrested in connection with C.R. No.I-152 of 2021 registered with Hill Line Police Station, Thane, they shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount. The Appellants shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses or contact, threaten or infuence the complainant in any manner. The Appellants in the meantime to co-operate with the investigation and present themselves before the Investigating Ofcer on 14th, 16th and 18th August, 2021 between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. List the matter on 24.08.2021. (M.S.KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 6: Ingale FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 574 OF 2021 Mr.Vijay S. Thakur, for the Appellants. Mr.N.B. Patil, APP for State. Smt.Apeksha Dalvi - Respondent No.2 present. CORAM : M.S.KARNIK, J. DATE : 24th AUGUST, 2021 P.C. The matter pertains to the assignment of Hon'ble Anuja Prabhudessai, J. On 12/08/2021, the matter was listed before this Court in view of the office order. The complainant appeared and mentioned the matter. The matter be placed before appropriate Court on 25/08/2021. (M.S.KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 9: Megha 11_apeal _574_2021.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.574 OF 2021 Farooq Sattar Dalvi and Anr. ...Appellants Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents …. Mr. Vijay S. Thakur with Mr. R.S. Deshpande for the Appellants. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED: 31st AUGUST, 2021. P.C.:- It is stated that matter does not pertain to the assignment of this Court. Registry to verify and place it before appropriate Court. Stand over to 07/09/2021. Interim relief, if any, to continue till the next date. (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) MEGHA Digitally signed by Date: 2021.09.01 14:29:07 S PARAB

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. APPEAL NO. 574 OF 2021 Farooq Sattar Dalvi And Anr. ....APPELLANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mrs.Prabha Badadare i/b Vijay Thakur for Appellant Ms. P.N.Dabholkar, APP for Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI J DATE : 7th September, 2021 P.C. : The Registry to verify and place the matter before the appropriate Court. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.574 OF 2021 FAROOQ SATTAR DALVI AND ANOTHER )...APPELLANTS V/s. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA )...RESPONDENT Mr.R.S.Deshpande a/w. Mr.Vijay Thakur, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent. CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J. DATE : 28th APRIL 2022 P.C. : 1 Heard learned APP and learned counsel for the appellant. Vide order dated 12th August 2021 this Court had granted interim protection which is continued from time to time. Let the interim protection so granted be continued till the next date. 2 Stand over to 16th June 2022. (V. G. BISHT, J.)

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.574 OF 2021 Farooq Sattar Dalvi & Anr. ….Appellants Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents Mr. Vijay S. Thakur, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 22nd DECEMBER, 2022 P.C. : The learned counsel for the appellants states that he will supply a spare copy within a period of two days from today. Once the spare copy is supplied, issue fresh notice to the respondent No.2, returnable on 8.2.2023. Interim order granted vide order dated 12.8.2021 to continue till then. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Digitally signed by PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE 10:38:05 +0530

Order - Status 17: 1 of 1 16-apeal-574-21 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 574 OF 2021 __________ __________ Farooq Sattar Dalvi & Anr. ..Appellants Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. Vijay S. Thakur for Appellants. Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for State/Respondent No.1. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 8 FEBRUARY 2023 PC : Await service on the Respondent No.2. Stand over to 29/03/2023. Interim order granted earlier to continue till the next date. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Gokhale

Order - Status 19: 27.Apeal.574.2021.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.574 OF 2021 Farooq Sattar Dalvi and another Appellant versus The State of Maharashtra and another Respondents Adv.R.S.Deshpande with Vijay Thakur, Advocates for Appellant. Ms.P.N.Dabholkar, APP, for State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 12th June 2023 Office note indicates that notice was issued to Respondent no.2 on 16th January 2023. Service report is awaited. It is noticed that this appeal is pending in this Court since long. Hence concerned Police Station is directed to take steps to intimate/serve Respondent no.2. Stand over to 5th July 2023. Interim relief granted earlier, if any, to continue till then. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) MST PC :

Order - Status 21: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 574 OF 2021 Farooq Sattar Dalvi And Anr. Appellants Versus The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. Respondents Mr. R.S. Deshpande i/by Mr. Vijay S. Thakur, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms. Pallavi N. Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : th 5 JULY, 2023. PER COURT : Learned APP on instructions submit that the intimation about the hearing of this Appeal has been given to Respondent No.2. However, she has requested for time as she is undergoing some treatment. This Appeal is pending in this Court since 2021. By way of last chance the Appeal is adjourned till 12th July, 2023. Stand over to 12th July, 2023. Interim relief granted earlier shall continue to operate till the next date. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) SUNNY ANKUSHRAO THOTE Digitally signed by SUNNY ANKUSHRAO THOTE Date: 2023.07.07 10:53:40 +0530

Order - Status 23: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 574 OF 2021 Farooq Sattar Dalvi And Anr. ...Appellants Versus The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents …. Mr. R.S. Deshpande a/w Mr. Vijay S. Thakur, Advocate for Appellant. …. Ms. P. N. Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent – State. Ms. Saili Dhuru, Appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2.s CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 12 th JULY, 2023. P.C.:- Learned APP has tendered report from the concerned Police Station indicate that the intimation be given to the complainant and request is made by the complainant for providing legal aid. Report is taken on record. Learned Ms. Saili Dhuru is appointed to represent for Respondent No.2. Stand over to 19th July, 2023. Interim relief granted earlier shall continue to operate till the next date. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 574 OF 2021 Farooq Sattar Dalvi And Anr. ...Appellants Versus The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents Mr.R. S. Deshpande a/w Mr.Vijay S. Thakur Advocate for Appellants. Ms. Saili Dhuru Advocate for Respondent No.2. Ms. P. N. Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent – State. …. …. ETHAPE DNYANESHWAR ASHOK Digitally signed by ETHAPE ASHOK Date: 2023.07.20 17:32:17 +0530 CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 19th JULY, 2023. P.C.:- This is an Appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act"). The appellants are aggrieved by order dated 10th July 2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan rejecting the application for anticipatory bail preferred by Appellants in connection with C.R. No. I-152 of 2021 registered with Hill Line Police Station, Thane City on 20th June 2021. The FIR was registered at the instance of Respondent No.2 for offences under Sections 354(D) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1) (r), 3(1)(w) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. D.A.Ethape 11-APEAL-574-2021.doc The case of the prosecution is that, the first informant is the office bearer of political party and belongs to Scheduled Caste. She is also member of Thane District Rural Whats APP group. The accused are also member of the same political party and whats-app group. The accused posted messages on those whats-app groups which was derogatory nature. Appellant No.2 belongs to scheduled caste. Hence, offence under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w) of the Atrocities Act cannot be attracted against him. The learned Sessions Judge while rejecting the application for anticipatory bail has observed that, Section 3(1)(w) is not attracted in this case. However, the application was rejected on that ground that Section 3(1)(r) is attracted qua the appellant No.1. The offence under Section 354(D) of IPC is bailable. Learned Advocate for Appellant submitted that, neither Section 354(D) of IPC nor the provision of Atrocities Act invoked against the appellants are attracted in this case. All insults or intimidation to a person will not be an offence under the Act unless such insult or intimidation is on account of victim belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the said Act indicate that the ingredient of intentional insult and intimidation must be with an intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe. The whats-app messages posted were not with the object of humiliating any member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The Appellants as well as the complainant happen to be members of same political party. Assuming the language used in the posts on whats-app is derogatory, it cannot be said to have been posted with an intent to humiliate the member of the Scheduled Caste or the Scheduled Tribe. The complainant was annoyed with the Appellants taking some decisions without consulting her which led to exchange of messages. The intent therefore is absent. Learned APP and learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 submitted that, the nature of message posted by the accused was derogatory and sent with a view to insult and humiliate the complainant as she belongs to Scheduled Caste. Prima facie offences are made out and the Appellants are not entitled for anticipatory bail. It appears that, the alleged message was on account of animosity between Appellants and the complainant. Appellants as well as complainant are members of the same party and same whats-app group. In any case, the offences under the Atrocities Act cannot be applied against Appellant No.2 as he belongs to Scheduled Caste. Section 354(D) of the IPC relates to offence of stalking. Prima facie it is debatable whether the said provision can be applied in the present case. Section 3(1)(r) of Atrocities Act, provides that, whoever intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view. Case of the complainant is that, message was sent on whats-app group. The record does not indicate that, the alleged message was forwarded to intentionally insult or intimidate the complainant because she was belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. In these circumstances, bar under Section 18 of the Atrocities Act would not be an impediment to grant relief sought in this Appeal. ORDER (i) Criminal Appeal No. 574 of 2021 is allowed. (ii) Interim order dated 12th August 2021 is confirmed. (iii) Impugned Order dated 10th July 2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1101 of 2021 is set aside. (iv) In the event of arrest of the appellants in connection with C.R. No.I-152 of 2021 registered with Hill Line Police Station, Thane, City, they shall be released on bail on furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount. (v) Appeal stands disposed off. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)