All Cases

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8514/2018 Prashanti CHS Ltd. … Petitioner V/s. District Dy. Registrar of Cooperative Society & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Zain Mookhi a/w. Ms. Palak Patel & Ms. Janhavi Doshi i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for the Petitioner CORAM: K.K. TATED & S. K. SHINDE, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 4, 2018 P.C. : 1 Heard. By this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner challenges the order dated 31.05.2016 passed by the learned District Dy. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Mumbai – 4, the competent authority u/s.5A of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the promotion of construction, sale, management and transfer) Act,1963 rejecting the Petitioner's Application for deemed conveyance. 2 Hence, office to verify and place the matter before appropriate Bench. (S. K. SHINDE, J.) ( K. K. TATED, J. ) Basavraj Gurappa Patil Digitally signed by Basavraj Gurappa Patil Date: 2018.10.06 13:23:16 +0530 Basavraj G. Patil 1/1

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti CoOp. Hsg. Society Ltd. … Petitioner V/s. District Deputy Registrar of Coop. Society & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Zain Mookhi a/w Ms. Palak Patel and Ms. Janhavi Doshi for the Petitioner. Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1 State. CORAM : V.L. ACHLIYA, J. DATE : 13th FEBRUARY, 2019. P.C. : Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 13.03.2019. Learned A.G.P. waives the notice for Respondent No.1. In addition the service through the process of Court, the Petitioner is granted liberty to serve the Respondents by all other modes of service as permissible in law. Parties are put to notice that Petition may be heard finally at the stage of admission. (V.L. ACHLIYA, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Cooperative Housing Society Limited .....Petitioner V/s. District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative .....Respondents Society and others Mr. Zain M. a/w Ms. Janhavi Doshi i/b Mansukhlal H. & Co. for the Petitioner Mr. Sandeep Maurya for Respondent no. 6 Mr. Rajesh A. Kanojia for Respondent nos. 2 to 5 CORAM : S. S. SHINDE, J. DATE : MARCH 13, 2019. P.C. The learned counsel appearing for Respondents seek three weeks time so as to enable them to file reply. 2 Time is granted as prayed for. Stand over to 08/04/2019. Needless to observe that copy of the reply be served upon the learned counsel for the Petitioner in advance. [S. S. SHINDE, J.]

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ….. Petitioner VERSUS District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society & Ors. ….. Respondents Mr.Zain Mookhi, i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company for the Petitioner. Mr.S.D.Rayrikar, A.G.P. for the Respondent no.1. Ms.Krishna Borkate, i/b. Mr.R.A.Kanojia for the Respondent nos. 3 to 5. Mr.Sandeep Maurya for the Respondent no.6. CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : th APRIL, 2019 8 P.C . Learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 3 to 5 by way of last opportunity prays for time till 22nd April,2019 for filing reply. Time granted as prayed for as last opportunity. A copy of the reply shall be served in advance upon the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. List the writ petition on board on 26th April,2019. [S.S.SHINDE, J.]

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ....Petitioner V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society ....Respondent And Ors CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J DATE : 26th April, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 19.07.2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: 44-WP-8514-18.DOC Sayali Upasani IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.- 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-Op Hsg. Soc. Ltd ...Petitioner Vs. District Deputy Registrar of Co-op Soc. And Others ...Respondents Ms. Sayali Puri i/b Mansukhlal Hiralal and Co., for Petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Maurya, for Respondent No. 6. Mr. Rajesh Parwani, for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Mr. S. H. Kankale, AGP for State. CORAM:- N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED:- 3rd JULY, 2023 PC:- Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Mr. Parwani, the learned Counsel submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and undertakes to file Vakalatnama. It seems that the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 have already filed an affidavit-in-reply. By way of final indulgence, three weeks time is granted to the Counsel to file Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and work out the matter. Stand over to 24th July, 2023. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited....PETITIONER V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR J DATE : 24th July, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 07/08/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 21: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited....PETITIONER V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society And Ors ....RESPONDENT Mr. Akash Rebello a/w Ms. Sayali Puri and Mr. Mohammed Lokhandwala i/b Mansukhlal Hiralal and Co for Petitioner Mr. Piyush Raheja i/b Rajesh Parwani for Respondent No. 2 to 5 Mr. C. D. Mali AGP for State for Respondent No. 1 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE J DATE : 4th September, 2023 P.C. : S. O. to 25/09/2023 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ...Petitioner Versus District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society and Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Akash Rebello a/w Ms. Purvi Asheri, Ms. Sayali Puri, Mr. Mohammed Lokhandwala i/by Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for Petitioner. … … Mr. Piyush Raheja i/by Mr. Rajesh Parwani, for Respondent Nos.2 to 5. Mr. Sandeep Maurya, for Respondent No.6. Mr. P. P. Pujari, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 25 2023. P.C.: Petitioner-Society has filed this Petition challenging order dated 31 May 2016 passed by District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai City (4) and Competent Authority rejecting the application filed by Petitioner-Society for grant of unilateral deemed conveyance. I have heard Mr. Rebello, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioner, Mr. Raheja, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, Mr. Maurya, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.6 and Mr. Pujari, the learned A.G.P. appearing for Respondent No.1. Perusal of the impugned order dated 31 May 2016 would indicate that the main reason why the Competent Authority had rejected the application for deemed conveyance is the alleged amalgamation of plot of Petitioner-Society with the neighbouring plot of Nirmal's Nest Cooperative Housing Society. ("Nirmal's Nest"). Another ground for rejection is nonimpleadment of Nirmal's Nest Society. I find both the grounds of rejection to be totally untenable. Firstly, there is no concrete evidence of two plots being amalgamated. Reliance is placed on a communication issued by the Municipal Corporation on 19 October 2007 for the purpose of arriving at a conclusion that there is amalgamation of plots bearing C.T.S. No.2403 of Plot Eksar and C.T.S. No.436 of Village Borivali. The relevant portion of the communication reads thus: " Your plans submitted of the layout/amalgamation of above plot along with your letter dated 20.10.2006 are approvable as they are as per Development Control Rules, subject to the terms and conditions already registered under No.BDR2-06908-2007 dated 16.10.2007. These terms and conditions of the layout shall be binding not only on the Owners for the time being but also on their heirs executors, administrators, assignees and every person deriving title through or under them. Final approval to the amalgamation/layout will be given after you construct the roads including lighting, drainage, sewerage, etc and recreation amenity spaces is developed by leveling and adequate number of trees are provided on the same. You will please make it clear to your client that in case of breach of any of the terms and conditions, the deposit amount is liable to be forfeited and the permission granted liable to be revoked." The communication of Municipal Corporation dated 19 October 2007 would indicate that the Municipal Corporation had merely stated that the proposal of amalgamation was "approvable". The communication does not approve the amalgamation nor effects such amalgamation. Furthermore, the amalgamation of plots will have to be done by Revenue Authorities and not by Municipal Corporation. Municipal Corporation, being a Planning Authority, may consider whether joint development could be carried out on two neighbouring plots. Actual amalgamation of two C.T.S. numbers will have to be ultimately approved by the revenue authorities. Furthermore even if such amalgamation was to take effect on the basis of communication dated 19 October 2007, the same would have no effect on right of Petitioner-Society to seek deemed conveyance in respect of plot bearing C.T.S No.436, Village Borivali. It is submitted that a common developer appointed by Petitioner and Nirmal's Nest Society, who had decided to construct building on both plots and had moved a proposal before MCGM for sanctioning plans on amalgamated plots. That the said developer had already been removed and at present there is no proposal for effecting joint development on two plots. Be that as it may. The amalgamation has not actually been effected and even if it was to be effected, the same would not defeat the right of the Petitioner-Society to seek deemed conveyance. The ground of non impleadment of Nirmal's Nest Society for rejection of unilateral deemed conveyance by the competent authority is also unfounded. The Petitioner-Society is claiming deemed conveyance of land on which its building is standing. For considering that application, why presence of neighbouring society is necessary is difficult to fathom. I am therefore of the view that the presence of Nirmal's Nest Society is not necessary while deciding application for grant of unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of Petitioner-Society. I therefore find that the impugned order dated 31 May 2016 passed by the competent authority to be indefensible. The competent authority is required to ignore the aspect of amalgamation and reconsider the application filed by Petitioner-society for grant of deemed conveyance. Accordingly, order dated 31 May 2016 is set aside and the proceedings are remanded to the competent authority for a fresh decision. All contention of parties, except on issues of amalgamation and joinder of Nirmal Nest Society, are let open. The Writ Petition is accordingly partly allowed. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ..Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra . ..Respondents Ms. Sheetal Gaikar i/b. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicant. Mr. A.A.Palkar, APP for the State. CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : 26th AUGUST, 2022. P.C. Issue Notice to Respondent No.2. Learned APP to make an endeavor to intimate the next date of hearing to the Respondent No.2, through the officer of the concerned police station. Stand over to 13.09.2022. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Shri. Tushar Sonawane for Applicant. Shri. A. A. Palkar, APP for the State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH D. NAIK J DATE : 11th October, 2022 P.C. : Await service. Stand over to 20/10/2022. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. ...Respondents Mr. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicant. Mr. V. B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State. $cdots cdots cdots$ $cdots cdots cdots$ CORAM: N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 20 OCTOBER 2022 $P.C. :=$ The Investigating Officer shall intimate about the filing of the present application and the next date of hearing of the application to the respondent No. 2. $2.$ Stand over to 16 November 2022. $(N.R. BORKAR, J.)$

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr. V. B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for Respondent-State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. R. BORKAR J DATE : 16th November, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 05/12/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra ••• Respondent Mr. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicant. Mr. V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State. Mr. Ravi Rajulwar, API, Sangola Police Station, Solapur. CORAM : R.N.LADDHA, J. DATE : 5 th December 2022 P.C. : The Investigating Officer is directed to inform the first informant about filing of the present application within a week. Stand over to 15 th December 2022. (R.N. LADDHA, J) Lata Panjwani, P.S.

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore Versus The State of Maharashtra Applicant. Respondent Mr. Tushar Sonawane, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State. Mr. Ashish Satpute, Legal Aid Counsel appointed. CORAM : R. N. Laddha, J. DATE: 15 th December 2022 Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL SUNIL PANJWANI PANJWANI Date: 2022.12.16 11:15:15 +0530 P.C.: Learned APP informs this Court that the Applicant is not in a position to engage private Advocate and requests to provide legal aid. Mr.Ashish Satpute, Counsel from the Legal Aid Panel is appointed as Advocate to espouse the cause of the Applicant. Office is directed to serve a copy of the Application to the learned counsel appointed on behalf of the Applicant. Page No. 1 of 2 15 th December 2022 36 ba 1685.22.docx Stand over to 9 th January 2023. (R. N. LADDHA, J.) L.S.Panjwani, P.S. Page No. 2 of 2 15 th December 2022

Order - Status 15: ba 1685.22 speaking.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore Versus The State of Maharashtra Applicant. Respondent CORAM : R. N. Laddha, J. (IN CHAMBER) DATE: 5 th January 2023 P.C.: The matter is taken in chamber suo moto. In Paragraphs 1 & 2 of the order dated 15 th December 2022, wherever the words 'Applicant' is there, it be replaced by words 'Respondent No.2'. The order dated 15 th December 2022 stands corrected accordingly. (R. N. LADDHA, J.) L.S.Panjwani, P.S. Page No. 1 of 1 15 th December 2022

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Tushar Sonawane a/w Pooja Satpute for Applicant. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for State. Mr. Amit Icham i/b Ashish Satpute for Complainant. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 8th February, 2023 P.C. : S. O. to 15/02/2023 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Tushar Sonawane a/w Pooja Satpute for Applicant. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for State. Mr. Ashish Satpute for Respondent No. 2 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 15th February, 2023 P.C. : S. O. to 17/02/2023 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: Urmila Ingale 22.ba 1685.22.doc URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Digitally signed by URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Date: 2023.02.17 14:22:07 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ...Applicant VS. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr. Tushar Sonawane a/w Ms.Pooja Satpute, for the Applicant. Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 17, 2023 P.C. : The matter to come up in due course. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1685 OF 2022 Samadhan Dattu Gore ..Applicant $v/s$ . The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent Mr. Tushar Sonawane for the Applicant. Mr. Ashish Satpute for the Respondent No.2 Mrs. A.A.Takalkar, APP for the State. CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : $13 th $ APRIL, 2023. $P.C.$ $1.$ This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the aforesaid Applicant, who is facing trial in Special Case No.7 of 2021 pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pandharpur. The said case arises from Crime No. 10 of 2022, registered with Sangola Police Station for the offences under Section 354, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4, 8, 12 and 42 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act. $2.$ Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 and learned APP for the State. I have perused PRASANNA P SALGAONKAR the records and considered the submissions advanced by the learned Digitally signed by PRASANNÄ‚ P SALGAONKAR Date: 2023.04.18 10:37:49 p +0530 Counsels for the respective parties. The aforesaid crime was registered pursuant to the FIR lodged by the mother-in-law of the victim. She has stated that on 04.01.2022 she had gone in search of the victim, who had gone to wash clothes near the rivulet (Odha). She saw the Applicant pulling the victim by her hand and heard the victim crying for help. She has stated that she had also heard the Applicant threatening her not to shout. When she intervened the Applicant left the victim and ran away from the spot. Based on the said report, initially crime was registered under Section 354, 506 of IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. Statement of the victim was recorded. The victim claimed that the Applicant had touched her chest and private parts. On the basis of the allegations made by the victim, Section 4 and 8 also came to be added. It is to be noted that though the Applicant is charged for committing offences under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, the statement of the victim does not prima facie indicate that the Applicant had committed penetrative sexual assault. In such circumstances, in my considered view, prima facie, the offence under Section 4 of not made out. The maximum sentence in respect of other offences is five years. The Applicant was arrested on 04.01.2022 and is presently in Judicial Custody. Considering the large pendency, the trial is not likely to commence in the near future. The application filed by the Applicant has been rejected mainly on the ground of antecedents of the Applicant. Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that the Applicant shall not visit Sangola District, Solapur, till the evidence of the victim is recorded. Considering the above facts and circumstances, in my considered view, this would be a fit case, to exercise discretion under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the Applicant. Hence the application is allowed on the following terms and conditions:- (i) The Applicant who is facing trial in Special Case No.7 of 2021 pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pandharpur arising out of Crime No. Crime No. 10 of 2022, registered with Sangola Police Station, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twentyfive Thousand Only) with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount; (ii) The Applicant shall not visit Sangola District till the evidence of the victim is recorded. (iii) The Applicant shall report to the nearest police station on the first Monday of every month till the date of framing of charge; (iv) The Applicant shall not interfere with the complainant or the other witnesses, or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (v) The Applicant shall keep the Special Court as well as the Investigating Officer informed of his permanent as well as temporary address, and his contact details, and/or change of residence or mobile details from time to time. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.961 OF 2005 IN REJECTED CASE NO.1154 OF 2017 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Shri H.G. Misar, Advocate for Appellant Present. CORAM : URMILA S. JOSHI­ PHALKE REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 15th June, 2017 In view of the dismissal of Civil Application No.960/2005 vide Court's order dated 04/08/2007 and First Appeal Stamp numbered as Rejected Case, this Civil Application Stamp does not survive. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 15.06.17

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1835 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders None present for the petitioner Mr.S.N.Gawade A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 26th NOVEMBER 2009 P.C. : None present for the petitioner when called. Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1835 of 2009 Kiran Dhondopant Thakur ....Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & anr. ....Respondents Mr. D.V. Sutar for the petitioner. Ms. A.T. Jhaveri-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 18th July, 2011 PC: Issue notice for final disposal, returnable on or before 16th August, 2011. Ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b). (B.R. GAVAI, J)

Order - Status 16: rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURSIDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1835 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or orders or directions & Judge's orders. Registrar's orders. None present. ..... ..... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 12, 2011. P.C.: None for the petitioners. Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. (A.S.OKA, J.)

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1835 OF 2009 Kiran D. Thakur and anr. ...Petitioners v/s The State of Maharashtra and anr. ...Respondents None for Petitioners. Mrs S.V. Gajare Dhumal, APP for Respondent State. CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL J. DATED : 3RD DECEMBER 2013. P.C. : The learned counsel for petitioners is again called, absent. S.O. to 19th December 2013. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL J.)

Order - Status 23: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1835 OF 2009 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 358 OF 2013 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1835 OF 2009 Kiran Dhondopant Thakur and another .....Petitioners V/s. State of Maharashtra & another ....Respondents Mr. D. V. Sutar Advocate for Petitioner Mr. Y. M. Nakhwa APP for the State. CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J. DATED : JANUARY 16, 2014 PC : Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that co-accused had filed a petition seeking quashing of the proceedings. This Court (Coram : A. S. Oka, J.) by an order dated 13/07/2009, has issued Rule and granted interim relief in terms of prayer clause 'b'. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petitioners are similarly situated, hence : Rule. Interim relief in terms of prayer clause 'b'. (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.)

Order - Status 25: Ghuge IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1835 OF 2009 Kiran Dhondopant Thakur and Anr … Petitioners V/s. State of Maharashtra and Anr … Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.358 OF 2013 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1835 OF 2009 Kiran Dhondopant Thakur and Anr … Applicants V/s. State of Maharashtra and Anr … Respondents Ms. Kavita Vijapure i/b D.V. Sutar for the petitioners. Smt. M.R. Tidke, APP for the State. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : APRIL 26, 2023 P.C.: Learned advocate for the petitioners has filed praecipe for withdrawal of the petition. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. In view of dismissal of the writ petition, Criminal Application stands disposed of accordingly. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1771 OF 2010 Amit Anant Thite and Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Venkatesh A.Shastry for Petitioners Mrs. M.R. Tidake -APP for State. Mr.U.P. Warunjikar for Respondent No.2 ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 18TH AUGUST, 2010 P.C. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners seeks leave to withdraw this writ petition. Writ petition is allowed to be withdrawn. If an application for exemption is filed by the petitioners in the Trial Court, the same may be considered favourably and the presence may not be insisted unless it is absolutely necessary. petition is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.966 OF 2013 MR.SHABBU RAUF KHAN )...APPLICANT V/s. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. )...RESPONDENTS Mr.Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Mr.Subhash Hulyalkar Advocate for Applicant. Mrs.S.V.Sonawane APP for the State. CORAM: ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATE : rd JULY, 2013. 3 P.C. : 1 Heard. 2 Since the period of three moths stipulated by the order dated 12.4.2013 is not over, the application is premature, so to say. 3 However, in the circumstances explained by the learned counsel for the applicant, instead of rejecting the application on that ground, it would be proper to consider it after 12.7.2013. 4 Stand over to 16.7.2013. (ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.) avk 1/1

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.966 OF 2013 SHABBU RAUF KHAN )...APPLICANT V/s. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. )...RESPONDENTS Mr.Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Mr.Subhash Hulyalkar Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.G.P.Mulekar APP for the State. CORAM: ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATE : 16th JULY, 2013. P.C. : 1 Heard Mr.Satyavrat Joshi, the learned counsel for the applicant, and Mrs.G.P.Mulekar, the learned APP for the State. 2 The previous application filed by the applicant was withdrawn by him, after submitting that the applicant be granted liberty to apply afresh for bail, should the trial not commence within a reasonable time. Liberty was granted by the court to the applicant to apply afresh for bail, in the event of the trial not commencing within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the said order by the court. The order was passed on 12.4.2013. 3 I am informed that, though the said period is over, the trial has not yet commenced. The learned counsel for the applicant has produced a copy of the roznama of the trial court, which indicates that the trial has not yet commenced, and that, even a Charge has not yet been framed. 4 I have, therefore, considered the facts of the case, afresh. It is clear that though the participation of the applicant in the alleged incident, is indicated by the material in the chargesheet, the role attributed to the applicant is not as grave, as has been attributed to, two other accused. The applicant is alleged to have given a blow to the deceased by a pana on the wrist of the deceased. 5 The applicant is of 19 years. There are no antecedents. The applicant is in custody for a period of more than nine months. 6 Under these circumstances, I am inclined to grant one opportunity to the applicant of availing of liberty, subject to certain conditions. 7 The application is allowed. 8 The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/, with one surety in the like amount, or two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/ each, on the following conditions : i) The applicant shall not contact, meet or approach any of the prosecution witnesses, in any manner, whatsoever. ii) The applicant shall report to the Pimpri Police Station every Sunday, between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m., till the disposal of the case against him. (ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1211 OF 2015 A/W CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1539/2015 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2992/2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2990/2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2991/2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.666/2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.667/2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2988/2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2989/2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2984/2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1211/2015 Dilip Babubhai Shah & Ors. … Petitioners. Vs. Babubhai Sardarmal Shah & Ors. … Respondents. Mr. Nitin V. Gangal, Advocate for respondent nos.4, 7, 10,11 and 12. Ms K.R. Daviervala & Mr. Y.P. Jijina i/b Mulla & Mulla & AB &C for applicants/appellants. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 30th JUNE, 2022. CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Digitally signed by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date: 2022.07.02 17:18:57 +0530 P.C.: This Court has suggested the parties to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement of the dispute, in view of the fact that most of the appellants and respondents are senior citizens. Learned Counsel for the parties seek a week's time to suggest the name of a 'Mediator'. List the appeal for further directions, on 08.07.2022. (PRITHVIRAJ K.CHAVAN, J.)

Order - Status 8: Shailaja IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1211 OF 2015 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2984 OF 2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2988 OF 2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.667 OF 2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2991 OF 2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2990 OF 2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2992 OF 2020 A/W CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1539 OF 2015 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2989 OF 2020 A/W INTERIM APPLICATION NO.666 OF 2020 Dilip Babubhai Shah and others. ] Appellants Vs. Babubhat Sardamal Shah and others.] Respondents Ms. K.R. Daviervala i/b M/s. Mulla & Mulla and Craigie Blunt and Caroe, for Appellants/Applicants. ..... ..... Mr. Nitin V. Gangal, for Respondents No.4,7,10,11 and 12. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. DATED : 15th JULY, 2022. P.C. Parties are contemplating amicable settlement through the process of mediation. Parties are at liberty to take necessary steps in that regard and inform the Court accordingly. Stand over to 22nd July, 2022. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]

Order - Status 10: S.S.KilajeIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 Dilip Babubhai Shah and Ors. .. Appellants Versus Babubhai Sardarmal Shah & Ors. .. Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2984 OF 2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2988 OF 2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 667 OF 2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2990 OF 2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2991 OF 2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2992 OF 2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1539 OF 2015 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2989 OF 2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 666 OF 2020 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1211 OF 2015 Ms. K.R.Daviervala i/by M/s. Mulla & Mulla & Craige Blunt and Caroe for the Appellants .................... Ms. Prerna Shukla i/by Nitin V. Gangal for Respondent Nos. 4,7,10,11,12 ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JULY 22, 2022 P.C. : Ms. Daviervala, learned counsel for appellants submits that appellants have taken out 8 interim applications viz. IA/2984/2020, IA/2988/2020, IA/667/2020, IA/2990/2020, IA/2991/2020, IA/2992/2020, IA/2989/2020 & IA/666/2020, for bringing the legal heirs of deceased respondents on record as some of the respondents have expired. INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 666 OF 2020:- By this application, applicants seek to substitute legal heirs of deceased respondent No.17 who has expired on 22.03.2019. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 211 days to file the application and bring the legal heirs on record stands condoned. Leave to amend is granted. Re-verification is dispensed with. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order as per the schedule appended to the Interim Application. Once amendment is carried out, applicants are directed to serve the newly impleaded respondents and file appropriate affidavit of service and inform the newly added respondents about the hearing scheduled before the Mediator. Interim Application No. 666 of 2020 stands disposed of. INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 667 OF 2020:- By this application, applicants seek to substitute legal heirs of the deceased respondent No.16 who has expired on 26th/27th January, 2019. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 264 days to file the application and bring the legal heirs on record stands condoned. Leave to amend is granted. Re-verification is dispensed with. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order as per the schedule appended to the Interim Application. Once amendment is carried out, applicants are directed to serve the newly impleaded respondents and file appropriate affidavit of service and inform the newly added respondents about the hearing scheduled before the Mediator. Interim Application No. 667 of 2020 stands disposed of. INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2984 OF 2020:- By this application, applicants seek to substitute legal heirs of deceased respondent No.5 who has expired on 08.06.2013. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 27 days to file the application and bring the legal heirs on record stands condoned. Leave to amend is granted. Re-verification is dispensed with. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order as per the schedule appended to the Interim Application. Once amendment is carried out, applicants are directed to serve the newly impleaded respondents and file appropriate affidavit of service and inform the newly added respondents about the hearing scheduled before the Mediator. Interim Application No. 2984 of 2020 stands disposed of. INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2988 OF 2020:- By this application, applicants seek to substitute legal heirs of deceased respondent No.1 who has expired on 06.02.2014. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 27 days to file the application and bring the legal heirs on record stands condoned. Leave to amend is granted. Re-verification is dispensed with. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order as per the schedule appended to the Interim Application. Once amendment is carried out, applicants are directed to serve the newly impleaded respondents and file appropriate affidavit of service and inform the newly added respondents about the hearing scheduled before the Mediator. Interim Application No. 2988 of 2020 stands disposed of. INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2989 OF 2020:- By this application, applicants seek to substitute legal heirs of deceased respondent No.3 who has expired on 03.12.2016. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 1090 days to file the application and bring the legal heirs on record stands condoned. Leave to amend is granted. Re-verification is dispensed with. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order as per the schedule appended to the Interim Application. Once amendment is carried out, applicants are directed to serve the newly impleaded respondents and file appropriate affidavit of service and inform the newly added respondents about the hearing scheduled before the Mediator. Interim Application No. 2989 of 2020 stands disposed of. INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2990 OF 2020:- By this application, applicants seek to substitute legal heirs of deceased respondent No.2 who has expired on 06.03.2019. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 267 days 36.ao.1211.15+.doc to file the application and bring the legal heirs on record stands condoned. Leave to amend is granted. Re-verification is dispensed with. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order as per the schedule appended to the Interim Application. Once amendment is carried out, applicants are directed to serve the newly impleaded respondents and file appropriate affidavit of service and inform the newly added respondents about the hearing scheduled before the Mediator. Interim Application No. 2990 of 2020 stands disposed of. INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2991 OF 2020:- By this application, applicants seek to substitute legal heirs of deceased respondent No.28 who has expired on 06.10.2015. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 27 days to file the application and bring the legal heirs on record stands condoned. Leave to amend is granted. Re-verification is dispensed with. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order as per the schedule appended to the Interim Application. Once amendment is carried out, applicants are directed to serve the newly impleaded respondents and file appropriate affidavit of service and inform the newly added respondents about the hearing scheduled before the Mediator. Interim Application No. 2991 of 2020 stands disposed of. 36.ao.1211.15+.doc INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2992 OF 2020:- By this application, applicants seek to substitute legal heirs of deceased respondent No.33 who has expired on 05.06.2013. For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 27 days to file the application and bring the legal heirs on record stands condoned. Leave to amend is granted. Re-verification is dispensed with. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order as per the schedule appended to the Interim Application. Once amendment is carried out, applicants are directed to serve the newly impleaded respondents and file appropriate affidavit of service and inform the newly added respondents about the hearing scheduled before the Mediator. Interim Application No. 2992 of 2020 stands disposed of. Ms. Daviervala on instructions submits that appellants have already compromised and settled the matter/lis with respondent Nos. 42 to 85 and in that view of the matter seeks leave of this Court to delete the names of respondent Nos. 42 to 85. Affidavit to that effect shall be filed by the appellants within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order. Leave to delete respondent Nos. 42 to 85 as prayed for is granted. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from the date of uploading of the order. Re-verification stands dispensed with. Both learned counsel appearing for the parties submit that as suggested by this Court on the previous occasion, they have taken instructions from their clients and are ready to go before the Court appointed Mediator for reconciliation / settlement. Mr. Vishal Kanade, Advocate practicing in this Court and having his office at 103, Gundecha Chambers, Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Mumbai (Mobile No. 9819668711) is appointed as Mediator to mediate on all issues and disputes between the parties. Appellants shall pay 50% of the fee whereas respondent Nos. 4,7,10,11,12, who are the principle contesting respondents shall bear the remaining 50% fees of the Mediator. The Mediator is requested to submit his report within a period of 8 weeks from today. Appeal from Order No. 1211 of 2015, stood over to 20th September, 2022. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] SONALI SATISH KILAJE Digitally signed by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date: 2022.07.28 18:26:46 +0530

Order - Status 5: SALUNKE J V Digitally signed by SALUNKE J V Date: 2023.01.13 17:42:56 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 4 OF 2020 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17167 OF 2022 Sunil Tukaram Jagtap } Petitioner Versus Sanjay Krishnarao Taksande } and Ors. } Respondents Ms. Radhali Kadam with Mr. S. S. Kulkarni for the petitioner. Mr. A. R. Gole for respondent no. 1. Mr. Hrishikesh Chavan for respondent no. 2. Mr. P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader with Mr. M. M. Pabale, AGP for State. Mr. Anil Sakhare, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kiran Gandhi i/b. Little and Co. for respondent no. 4. Mr. Aditya A. Joshi i/b. Mr. Abhijeet A. Joshi for respondents 5 and 6 (MSETCL). CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA, Act.CJ.& SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE: JANUARY 13, 2023 P.C.: 1. The learned advocate for respondent no. 2 seeks time to file affidavit in reply to the interim application. The reply shall be filed within one week from today. 2. Place the matter on 1st February 2023. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 1

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.4 OF 2020 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.17167 OF 2022 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.4 OF 2020 Sunil Tukaram Jagtap ....Petitioner/Applicant V/S Sanjay Krishnarao Taksande & Ors. ....Respondents … Mr. Shriram S. Kulkarni for the Petitioner/Applicant. Mr. G.S. Godbole a/w Mr. A.R. Gole for Respondent No.1. Mr. Hrishikesh Chavan for Respondent No.2-MSEB. Mr. Anil Sakhare, Senior Advocate and Mr. Kiran Gavellkar i/b M/s. Little & Co. for Respondent No.4-MSEDCL. Mr. P.P. Kakade, GP a/w Mr. M.M. Pabale, AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 7-State. … Mr. Abhijit Joshi for Respondent Nos.5 and 6-MSETCL. CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA, ACJ & SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 1st FEBRUARY 2023. P.C.: 1 We have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner/Applicant and the learned Advocates for the respective Respondents. 2 The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has filed Interim Application for amendment in view of the subsequent development. He submits that the Petitioner had challenged the appointment of Respondent No.1 initially with Respondent No.5. The tenure of Respondent No.1 with Respondent No.5 is over. Fresh selection process was conducted by Respondent No.4 in which Respondent No.1 is selected as Director (Operations). The same is also against the rules. The rules require that a person with impeccable past history can be considered. The Respondent No.1 does not fit into it. 3 The learned Advocate for the Respondent submits that the fresh appointment is by another employer, the cause of action of the Writ Petition now does not subsist. In view of that in a Writ Petition, for which the cause of action does subsist, amendment may not be allowed. 4 It is not disputed by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner that when the PIL was filed Petitioner was seeking writ of quo warranto qua appointment of Respondent No.1 by Respondent No.5. The tenure of Respondent No.1 with Respondent No.5 is over. Respondent No.4 conducted fresh selection process and has selected Respondent No.1 as Director (Operations). The same would be a completely fresh cause of action as the employer and the designation has changed. 5 In light of above, as the relief in the original Writ Petition itself has become infructuous, it would be improper to consider the present 2/3 Application for amendment. It is for the Petitioner to take appropriate steps by filing proceedings as may be maintainable. 6 In light of above, the PIL and Interim Application stands disposed of. The Petitioner may take proceedings as may be permissible under law. In that event all contentions of the Petitioner as well as respective Respondents are kept open. No costs. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM Digitally signed by SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM Date: 2023.02.04 10:27:34 +0530