All Cases

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.325 OF 2009 Hemant Digamber Pawar 2. Sandeep @ Balya Rajbali Manohar ...Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent --- Shri Teja Katdhare for Applicants Shri S.S. Pednekar APP for State ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED 3RD FEBRUARY, 2009 P.C. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants and the learned APP for the State. The Applicants are arrested in connection with an offence punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 324,504 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Kolshewadi Police Station, Kalyan (East),Dist. Thane on 20.3.2008. The chargesheet has been filed. It is alleged that the Applicants along with others had assaulted the Complainant and others with sticks and, as a result, one Gopal Dhumal had received injuries and he thereafter, succumbed to the injuries on 22.3.2008. In the first information, it has been stated that some unknown persons have assaulted the deceased and others. Perusal of the material, which is on record shows that there are contradictions in respect of the statements of eye witnesses. Exact number of persons, who had assaulted the complainant and others differs from witness to witness. No specific role, otherwise, has been attributed to the present Applicants. Applicants have not been identified by the Complainant since no identification parade has been held by the Investigating Officer. Under these circumstances, in my view, prima facie case is made out for grant of bail. The Applicants be released on bail in a sum of Rs.5,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. The Applicants shall report to the Koleshwadi Police Station, Kalyan (East), Dist. Thane once in a month. Application is disposed of. V.M. KANADE 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 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 12384 OF 2024 In APPEAL FROM ORDER STAMP NO. 13662 OF 2024 Mr. Bhalchandra Dattatray Sawant PETITIONER V/S Mr. Sanjay Taksande RESPONDENT None for the Applicant. Mr. Pranjali Jadhav i/b Siddharth Karpe, for Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. M. SATHAYE J DATE : 14th November, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 03/12/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 12384 OF 2024 In APPEAL FROM ORDER STAMP NO. 13662 OF 2024 Mr. Bhalchandra Dattatray Sawant ....PETITIONER V/S Mr. Sanjay Taksande ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. M. SATHAYE J DATE : 3rd December, 2024 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 04/12/2024 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION HUSENBASHA RAHAMAN NADAF Digitally signed RAHAMAN NADAF Date: 2024.12.04 18:57:40 +0530 INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 12384 OF 2024 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 13662 OF 2024 Bhalchandra Dattatray Sawant …Applicant Versus Sanjay Taksande …Respondent *** Mr. D. Chandrakant Ambilwade, for Applicant. Mr. Siddharth Karpe, for Respondent. *** CORAM : M.M. SATHAYE, J. DATE : 4 th DECEMBER, 2024 P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned counsel for Sole Respondent. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the Appeal from Order. The delay is stated to be 34 days. Considering the averments made in the application, sufficient cause is made out. Hence, the Application is allowed. Delay is condoned. (M.M. SATHAYE, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Amk FIRST APPEAL NO. 449 OF 2016 Mr. Farogh Ahd. Zahor Ahd. Ansari Appellant Vs. M/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd. & Anr. Respondents Mr. Abhay A. Jadhavar i/b Ashok B. Tajane for the Appellant. CORAM : DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J. DATE : 26th AUGUST, 2016. P. C. : Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Admit. The appellant to furnish the private paper book within one year from the date of this order. Copy thereof be served on the respondents. After the private paper book is filed, the appeal be fixed for hearing as per CMIS date. [DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.]

Order - Status 7: Vidya Amin FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL No. 449 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, inces, Court's Court's or Judge's orders orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr. Ashok B. Tajane, Advocate for the appellant. CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED: 26th September, 2017. P.C.: The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that respondent No. 1 is served by publication. He further prays to extend the time to file paper book. Time to file private paper book is extended by one month from today. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 449 OF 2016 Mr. Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. Ansari V/S Appellant Adv.Y.G.Thorat i/by Ashok B. Tajane For Appellant Rupam Ghosh For Respondent No. 2 (vp Filed Before Admission) R.no.2 Is Duly Served Through Court Notice For Respondent CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J DATE : 21st March, 2018 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the Appellant, Stand 28/03/2018 and tagged with caa(st)8671/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.449 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate Kavita Shinde i/by Advocate A.B. Tajane Present for Appellant. CORAM : V.R. KACHARE REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 24th September, 2018 3 weeks time is granted to supply copy of Newspaper. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 24.09.2018

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 449 OF 2016 Mr. Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. Ansari … Appellant V/s M/s Kataria Transport Co. Ltd. And Anr. … Respondents Mr. Sharad Bhosale i/b Mr. Ashok B. Tajane, for the Appellant. CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J. DATED : 13TH JANUARY, 2020. P.C. Place this matter under the caption of " For Final Hearing" on 27th February, 2020. ( V. G. BISHT, J.)

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 449 OF 2016 Mr. Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. Ansari ....Appellant V/S M/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd. And Anr. ....Respondent Mr Y G Thorat h/for Mr Ashok B Tajane, Advocate For Appellant CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J DATE : 27th February, 2020 P.C. : Mentioned at 2.00 p.m. At the request of the Advocate for the Appellant, place the matter on Board for hearing on 05/03/2020. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 449 OF 2016 Mr. Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. Ansari ....Appellant V/S M/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd. And Anr. ....Respondent CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J DATE : 5th March, 2020 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 02/04/2020 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: Shailaja IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.449 OF 2016 Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. Ansari ] Appellant Vs. M/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd. ] and another ] Respondents ..... Mr. Akshay Kashid i/b Mr. Ashok B. Tajane, for Appellant. None for the Respondents. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. DATE : 4th FEBRUARY. 2021. P.C. This is an appeal for enhancement of the claim awarded by M.A.C.T, Mumbai. ….. It is contended that despite a claim to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/-, the learned Tribunal has granted only an amount of Rs.5,93,487/-. The appeal has already been admitted on 26th August, 2016. The appellant had also filed a paper book. In that view of the matter, list the appeal on the board of "Final Hearing" in the week commencing from 15th March, 2021. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 449 OF 2016 Mr. Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. ….Appellants Ansari V/s. M/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd. and another …..Respondents Mr. Y. G. Thorat i/b Mr. Ashok Tajane for the Appellants None for Respondents CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. DATE: JULY 14, 2021. P.C.: 1] None for the appellants. Prayer for listing the appeal for fnal hearing will be considered once the physical hearing commences. [NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]

Order - Status 23: SALGAONKAR M M Digitally signed by SALGAONKAR M Date: 2022.03.30 20:37:46 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.449 OF 2016 Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. Ansari .. Appellant Versus M/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd. & Anr. .. Respondents … ... Mr.Y.G.Thorat i/b Mr.Ashok B. Tajane for the Appellant. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 29th MARCH, 2022 P.C:- The appeal, being admitted on 26/08/2016, is ready for final hearing. The Registry has notified that R & P is reeeieed, but without paper-book. The learned Adeoeate for the appellant has already filed a prieate paper-book on 13/10/2017. Sinee the respondents are duly sereed and respondent No.2 is represented by Adeoeate Rupam Ghosh, list the appeal for final hearing on 04/05/2022 at 2.30 p.m. ( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.449 of 2016 Farogh and Zahoor and Ansari .. Appellant Versus M/s.Kataria Transport Co.Ltd and Anr .. Respondents … Mr. Ashok Tajane for the appellant. None for the respondent. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 4 th MAY 2022. P.C:- 1 Appeal is slated for final hearing. However, none appear for the contesting respondents. As far as Insurance Company is concerned, vakalatnama is filed by Rupam Ghosh, but Mr.Tajane, learned counsel for the appellant state that when he had telephonic talk with her, she had specifically informed that she had returned the papers to the Insurance Company. 2 In wake of the above, issue fresh notice to respondent no.2, intimating that the Appeal shall be taken for hearing on 4/7/2022 at 2.30 p.m in wake of the urgency expressed on behalf of the appellant. 3 Mr.Tajane is also at liberty to inform about the said order to any counsel of Oriental Insurance Company who normally represent the Company. ( SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

Order - Status 28: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BEFORE THE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.449 OF 2016 Mr. Farogh Ahmed Zahoor Ahmed Ansari … Appellant Versus M/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd. and Anr. … Respondents .... None for the Appellant and for the Respondents. .... CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. (HEAD OF THE PANEL) Y.A. GOSWAMI, REGISTRAR (CPC), MEMBER H.V. KULKARNI, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, MEMBER DATE : 13th AUGUST, 2022 P.C. : None appears for the parties. Transfer to the Regular Court. (H.V. KULKARNI) (Y.A.GOSWAMI) (SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J)

Order - Status 29: Ghuge IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.449 OF 2016 Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. Ansari … Appellant V/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd and Anr … Respondents Mr. Ashok Tajane for the appellant. Ms. S.S. Dwivedi for respondent No.2. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : JANUARY 25, 2023 P.C.: List the first appeal "for final hearing" on the board commencing from 6 th February, 2023. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 32: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 449 OF 2016 Mr. Farogh Ahd. Zahoor Ahd. Ansari, Age, - 48 years, Resident of F/8, 666 Tenements Compound Mumbai – 400011 ) ) ) ) Appellant Versus 1. M/s. Kataria Transport Co. Ltd., ) A-28, Suvidha Estate, ) Gandhinagar, bavla Highwa, ) Surkhej, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. ) 2. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ) 7, J. T. Road, Churchgate, ) Mumbai – 400 020. )Respondents (Policy No. 141700-2007/8927) ) Valid from 31/02/2007 to 20/03/2008 ) Mr. Ashok B. Tajane for the Appellant. Ms. Sneha Dwivedi for the Respondent No.2. CORAM : S. G. DIGE, J. DATE : 17th FEBRUARY 2023. JUDGMENT : Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. Shantanu Dhudum 228-FA449-2016.doc Both learned counsel submits that both the parties have settled the matter. The respondent no. 2-insurance company is ready to pay Rs. 34 Lakh as compensation to the appellant excluding the amount already deposited before the MACT, Mumbai in MACP No. 3476 of 2007 as per the order dated 19/07/2014. This amount of Rs.34 Lakh would be without interest, it excludes the compensation awarded by the MACT, Mumbai. Learned counsel for appellant agrees for it. The claimant who is present in the Court also agrees for the same. In view of the submission of both learned counsel and the appellant/claimant, I pass the following order: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed. ii. The respondent no. 2-insurance company shall deposit amount of Rs. 34 Lakhs before the Tribunal within two weeks from today. iii. The appellant is permitted to withdraw the amount deposited by the respondent no. 2 insurance company as award amount granted by the tribunal along with accrued interest thereon and the amount of Rs. 34 Lakhs. The Appeal stands disposed of. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Parties to act on authenticated copy of this order. (S. G. DIGE, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 118 OF 2015 Mr. Amit Dipak Nachankar ....Appellant V/S Mrs. Rakhee Amit Nachankar ....Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION IN FCA NO. 140 OF 2017 In FAMILY COURT APPEAL 118 OF 2015 Smt.rakhee Amit Nachankar Alias Rakhee Shrikrishna Moharir ....Applicant V/S Shri.amit Deepak Nachankar ....Respondent Ms Shaila Mukesh Joshi For Appellant Shri Vaibhav Prakash Patankar For Respondent For Respondent CORAM : R.M. SAVANT. & SMT. S.S. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 3rd July, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 10/07/2017. To be listed under caption "For Settlement/Filing Consent Terms". ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 118 OF 2015 Mr. Amit Dipak Nachankar ....Appellant V/S Mrs. Rakhee Amit Nachankar ....Respondent WITH CIVIL APPLICATION IN FCA NO. 140 OF 2017 In FAMILY COURT APPEAL 118 OF 2015 Smt.rakhee Amit Nachankar Alias Rakhee Shrikrishna Moharir ....Applicant V/S Shri.amit Deepak Nachankar ....Respondent Ms Shaila Mukesh Joshi For Appellant Shri Vaibhav Prakash Patankar For Respondent For Respondent CORAM : R.M. SAVANT. & SMT. S.S. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 10th July, 2017 P.C. : By consent Stand over to 14/08/2017 with liberty to move preceipe if occasion so arises. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: (903)-CAM-140-17.doc*.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.140 OF 2017 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.118 OF 2015 Smt. Rakhee Amit Nachankar alias Rakhee Shrikrishna Moharir Applicant IN THE MATTER BETWEEN Appellant Respondent Shri. S. C. Wakankar i/by Shri. Vaibhav P. Patankar for the Applicant/ Respondent. Ms. Shaila M. Joshi for the Appellant/Respondent. CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 19th JULY, 2017 P.C. The above Civil Application has been filed seeking withdrawal of the amount of Rs.5,00,000/ deposited in this Court by the original Appellant/husband. The Learned Counsel appearing for the original Appellant/husband has no objection to the said withdrawal. The Civil Application is accordingly allowed and made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. [SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J] [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 8: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2008 OF 2016 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO.1 OF 2013 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's orders Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Mr.A.R.Patil, A.G.P. for the applicant CORAM : K. K. TATED, J DATE : AUGUST 14, 2019 P.C.: . Heard. 2 By this Civil Application, Applicant is seeking stay of the operation and implementation of the judgment and award dated 19.12.2011 passed by Reference Court in L.A.R.No.295 of 2003 holding that Respondent original Claimants are entitled sum of Rs.1,49,085/- by way of additional compensation in respect of acquired land. 3 The learned A.G.P. submits that in the present proceedings, Special Land Acquisition Officer issued notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 16.7.1998 for acquiring Respondent's land admeasuring 0H. 39R. land from Gut no.52 situated at village Sheri Digar, Taluka Kalwan, District Nashik for the purpose of construction of Sule Unai Submergence Project. 4 The learned A.G.P. submits that after following due process of law, Special Land Acquisition Officer declared award under section 11 of the said Act dated 15.11.2000 holding that Respondent original Claimants are entitled compensation in respect of acquired land @ Rs.27,197/- per Hector. 5 The learned A.G.P. submits that, being aggrieved by the said award, Respondent original Claimant preferred reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the said Reference, Reference Court awarded enhanced compensation in respect of acquired land @ Rs.2,50,000/- per Hector and also claimed Rs.2.0 lac towards compensation of Mango and Jambhul trees. He submits that Reference Court without considering the evidence on record, particularly sale instance, held that Claimants are entitled additional compensation of Rs.1,49,085/-. 6 The learned A.G.P. submits that they have good chance of success in the present proceeding. He submits that if entire compensation is recovered by Respondent original Claimant by filing execution Application, then nothing will survive in the present proceeding. He submits that pending the hearing and final disposal of the First Appeal, this Hon'ble court be pleased to stay the operation and implementation of the impugned judgment and award. 7 Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Applicant and the impugned judgment and award passed by Reference Court holding that Claimants are entitled additional compensation of Rs.1,49,085/- I am satisfied that the Applicant has made out a case for allowing the Civil Application, but they have to deposit entire awarded amount with interest in the Reference Court on or before 19.10.2019 failing which the Civil Application shall stand dismissed without referring back to the court. Hence, following order is passed: a. Operation and implementation of the impugned judgment and award dated 19.12.2011 passed by Reference Court in LAR No. 295 of 2003 is stayed till the hearing and final disposal of the First Appeal, on condition that Applicant to deposit entire awarded amount with interest in the Reference Court on or before 19.10.2019, failing which Civil Applications shall stand dismissed without referring back to the court. b. Reference court is directed to invest the said amount in fixed deposit of any nationalized bank initially for a period of one year and same be continued till further orders. c. Liberty granted to the Respondents/Claimants to prefer an appropriate Application for withdrawal of amount, if they so desire, which will be decided on its own merits. d. Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly. e. No order as to costs. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2395 OF 2018 Nilesh Natvarlal Bhayani : Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra and anr. : Respondents. Mr. Aaditya A Gore for the Petitioner. Mr. K V Saste, Addl. PP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ. DATE : 26th JUNE 2018 P.C. 1 The Petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in the FIR which has been registered under Sections 3, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The said FIR has been registered by the Competent Authority i.e. Assistant Supply Officer exercising powers under the Essential Commodities Act. 2 The Petitioner is the partner of the firm M/s. Mahavir Gas Services which is a distributor of LPG Cylinders. The gravamen of the allegations against the said firm is in respect of the alleged malpractices in respect of the cylinders which are meant for commercial purposes. The deficiency as regards the number of cylinders found at site has been recorded in the FIR. The Petitioner's other two brothers one Mahendra N Bhayani and Virendra N Bhayani are also the accused along with the Petitioner. 3 In his endeavour of seeking quashing of the FIR on behalf of the Petitioner, the learned counsel for the Petitioner would contend that the Petitioner in fact as a whistle blower has brought to the notice of the authorities the alleged malpractices being committed in the said M/s. Mahavir Gas Services. It was further the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act would not be attracted as the said M/s. Mahavir Gas Services does not fit the requirements of the said Section 10. 4 We are unable to accept the said contentions of the learned counsel for the Petitioner implicit in the first contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner is the fact that there seems to be a dispute between the Petitioner and his brothers as a result of which the Petitioner it seems made a complaint to the authorities. In so far as the second contention is concerned, the same cannot be accepted in view of the Explanation to the said Section, which clarifies that a "Company" would include a "Firm", which the said M/s. Mahavir Gas Services undoubtedly is. Apart from Section 10, the offences alleged against the Petitioner are also under Sections 3, 7, 8 and 9 of the Essential Commodities Act. The contentions which were sought to be raised by the learned counsel for the Petitioner as regards nonactive participation of the Petitioner in running of the business of the said M/s. Mahavir Gas Services, at best can be the defences of the Petitioner which would be available to him for being urged at the appropriate time. We therefore do not deem this a fit case to exercise our writ jurisdiction at this stage. The above Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. Needless to state that the trial would be proceeded with on its own merits and in accordance with law. [PRAKASH D. NAIK, J] [R.M.SAVANT, J]