All Cases

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.208 OF 2007 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.69 OF 2001 Warsha...Applicant @ Elee Naren B. Goregaonkar V/s. Naren...Respondent Bhagwant Rao Goregaonkar Mr.Anshuman Jagtap, Advocate, h/f. Jyoti N. Shah, for the applicant. Ms.Shilpa Joshi, Advocate, for the respondent. CORAM : J.N. PATEL & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 13TH AUGUST, 2007. P.C.: 1.The applicant is permitted to withdraw the balance amount of Rs.1,47,000/- alongwith interest accrued thereon. 2.The Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.A. SAYED, J.] [J.N. PATEL, J.]

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Writ Petition No.7727 of 2004 ------------------------------------------------ Office NOtes, Office Court or Judge's Order Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's order --------------------------------------------------- Shri T.B.Bhosale for petitioner. CORAM: A.P.SHAH J. 14th October,2005 P.C. . Issue notice before admission to the respondents retutrnable on 28th November, 2005. Notice to indicate that the petition shall be disposed of at the admission stage. . Notice of the State Govt. to be served on the Government Pleader, High Court (Appellate Side,Writ Cell) Bombay.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER (STAMP) NO. 14893 OF 2018 Mr. Subhash Baburao Darekar Appellant Vs. Mr. V. R. Pawar, Chairman Tilak Nagar Sahayog CHS Ltd. & Ors. Respondents Mr. Sagar Batavia for the Appellant. Mr. Mohanish Chaudhari for the Respondents. CORAM : V. L. ACHLIYA, J. (VACATION COURT) DATE : 15th MAY, 2018. P. C. : Learned counsel for the Appellant seeks permission to withdraw the Appeal from Order with liberty to approach the appropriate authority to challenge the action on the part of the respondents. Allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed. Appeal from Order stands disposed of. [V. L. ACHLIYA, J.]

Order - Status 5: CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 99 OF 2012 The State of Maharashtra ...Applicant vs. Avit @ Pintu Anant Bhole ...Respondent Mrs.U.V. Kejriwal, APP for the Applicant-State. CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.V. POTDAR, JJ. FEBRUARY 1, 2012 P.C. :- Heard the learned APP for the applicant. Rule, returnable on 21st March, 2012. In addition to court service, private service is also permitted. (A.V. POTDAR, J.) (A.S. OKA, J.)

Order - Status 9: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.99 OF 2012 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or orders or directions & Judge's orders. Registrar's orders. Ms Sangeeta D. Shinde, APP for the Applicant. Shri Pankaj D. Kavale for the Respondent. CORAM : A.S. OKA & SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ DATE : 21ST MARCH, 2012 P.C.: . Heard the learned APP for the Applicant and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent who has opposed this application. The delay of 28 days in preferring the application for leave to appeal has been adequately explained. Sufficient cause is made out. Delay is condoned. The Rule is accordingly made absolute. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J) (A.S.OKA, J)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1506 OF 2023 … … Ajay Vijay Patil ....Applicant V/S State of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Satyawrat Joshi i/b Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar for the Applicant. Mr. R.M. Pethe, APP for Respondent-State. Mangini Tukaram Malyalkar, ASI, Vita Police Station present in Court. CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 23rd MAY 2023. (VACATION COURT) P.C.: At the request of learned Counsel for the Applicant, stand over to 7 th June 2023. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)

Order - Status 7: SA Pathan IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1506 OF 2023 Ajay Vijay Patil … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Satyavrat Joshi i/by Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar, for the Applicant. Mr. Veera Shine , APP for the State-Respondent. Mr. Dilip Shinde, for Intervener (Original complainant). Mr. Mallalkar M. Tukaram, ASI, Vita police station. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : JUNE 7, 2023 P.C.: This is an Application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking pre arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.229 of 2023 registered with Vita police station, Sangali for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 327 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution case, one Satish Sambhaji Nikam is the father-in-law of the informant who executed will deed of his property in the name of the wife of the informant and her younger brother. For this reason Applicant took grudge against the informant. On 24th April, 2023, when the informant had taken with him the gold ornaments from his shop, Satish Nikam along with Yash Nikam came there and asked the informant to accompany them to Vita in four wheeler vehicle. At about 3:00 pm when they reached Karve, Satish Nikam stopped his vehicle near the construction site of Dhaba of Applicant. There was discussion amongst them. During discussion, accused No.3 started assaulting informant. The Applicant assaulted informant. Due to assault of Applicants, the informant suffered grievous injury. The informant, therefore, filed report with respondent No.1 – police station. Apprehending arrest, the Applicant filed Application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. which is rejected by the order dated 11th May, 2023. Aggrieved thereby, the Applicant has filed the present Application. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that he has been falsely implicated. Due to assault caused by the Applicant, the informant suffered grievous injury. Having considered, the submissions and the case diary produced by learned APP. It appears that injuries caused by assault attributed to the Applicant are grievous in nature. Prima facie, injury certificate supports the case of prosecution that there is fracture over nose due to assault by hard object. The custodial interrogation of the Applicant is necessary to recover alleged loss of gold ornaments. The Applicant has previous crime bearing No.107 of 2012 under Sections 386, 387, 452, 323, 427 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code to his discredit. Therefore, considering the nature of offence alleged against the Applicant, alleged injuries caused by the Applicant and 2 previous antecedents, the Applicant does not deserve to be released on anticipatory bail. The Anticipatory Bail Application is, therefore, rejected. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 8: C.A. NO.197 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15548 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.198 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15552 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.199 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15556 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.200 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15559 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.201 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15565 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.202 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15569 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.203 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15574 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.204 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15577 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.205 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15582 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.206 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15584 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.207 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15588 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.208 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15592 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.209 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15699 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.210 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15707 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.211 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15713 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.212 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.15717 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.215 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.19542 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.216 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.19545 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.217 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.19549 OF 2008 WITH C.A. NO.218 OF 2008 IN C.R.A.(ST.) NO.19557 OF 2008 WITH -------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders of Coram, appearances, Court's . orders or directions and . Registrar's orders . -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.T.D. Deshmukh for the Applicants. Mrs.S.V. Gajare, AGP for Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J . DATED : 21ST OCTOBER, 2008. P.C. : 1.In each of the above Civil Applications the reasons for delay of over two years is that the Petitioners were prosecuting a review application before the Collector. Whether that review application is maintainable or not is another matter. The review application has not been decided as yet. However, by way of abundant caution, the Petitioners have also filed these Civil Revision Applications. 2.In these circumstances, the delay ought to be condoned. 3.The delay in filing the Civil Revision Applications is condoned. Office to place the matters for admission.

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

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

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

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandrabali Yadav .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … Mr. Vaibhav Ugle for the Applicant. Mr. Suraj S. Hulke, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 18TH DECEMBER, 2020. P.C:- Learned A.P.P. to place on record the postmortem report and supply a copy of the same to learned counsel for the Applicant. Re-notify for 13/01/2021. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 25th June, 2021 P.C. : . Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Stand over to 30/06/2021 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT None for Applicant Smt. A. A. Takalkar, AGP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 30th June, 2021 P.C. : None present for the applicant/respondent. Stand over to 26/07/2021 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … None for the Applicant. Mrs.A.A.Takalkar, APP for the State. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : JULY 26, 2021 P.C:- None for the applicant. Stand over to 9th August, 2021 [ SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J .]

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Vaibhab Ugle with Vikas Samawanshi for the applicant. Mr.S.H. Yadav, APP for the State. … CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 5th AUGUST, 2021 P.C:- 1 To ensure compliance of the order dated 18th December 2020, list the application tomorrow i.e. 6th August 2021 for virtual hearing. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugale for the Applicant. Mr. S.H. Yadav, A.P.P. for the State. Mr. N.B. Chapale, PSI attached to MIDC Bhosari Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad is present in the court. … CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 06TH AUGUST, 2021. P.C:- Learned A.P.P. states that the final opinion as to the cause of death of the deceased is received on 24/07/2021 and the death is opined to have caused on account of 'head injury'. Learned A.P.P. states that after receipt of the said report, the prosecution is in the process of adding Section 302 to the charge-sheet and necessary steps in that regard has been taken. In such circumstances, the Application cannot be considered at this stage. In any case, since the steps are taken to add Section 302 of the IPC, the Applicant is bound to receive intimation of the same and with the change in the charge, he is at liberty to circulate the present Application. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT None for Applicant Ms. P. N. Dabholkar APP for the State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE J DATE : 30th September, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 15/11/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: 25-BA-1128-2020.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 ••• Mr. Ramesh C. Yadav ... Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents None for the Applicant. Smt. P.N.Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.DATE :15 th NOVEMBER, 2022. P.C. : None for the applicant. 2 Stand over to $19^{text{th}}$ December, 2022. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 22: Shailaja IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 ….. ….. Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ] Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] Respondent None for the Applicant. Mr. A.A. Palkar, A.P.P, for Respondent – State. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. DATE : 5th JANUARY, 2024. P.C. None for the applicant. Looking to the orders passed by this Court from time to time, it appears that the applicant is not interested in prosecuting the application, hence, it stands rejected. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]