All Cases

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1031 OF 2020 … Chinmay Prashant Jagtap .. Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent None for the applicant. Smt. M.M.Deshmukh, APP for the State. CORAM: SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 10TH DECEMBER, 2020 P.C:- Re-notify after Christmas Vacation. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J Wakodikar

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1031 OF 2020 ..... Chinmay Prashant Jagtap ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents ….... Mr. Prashant Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. Smt. J. S. Lohokare, APP for State-Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 05th FEBRUARY, 2021 P.C. : . At the request of learned APP, stand over to 16th March (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1031 OF 2020 Chinmay Prashant Jagtap .... Applicant versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents ….... Mr.Pravin Mengane h/f Prashant P. Patil, Advocate for Applicant. Mr.S.H. Yadav, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 16th MARCH, 2021 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant, stand over to 27/04/2021. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1031 OF 2020 Chinmay Prashant Jagtap APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Pravin P. Mengane i/b Prashant P Patil for applicant. P.N.Dabholkar APP for Respondent/state. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIRENDRASINGH GYANSINGH BISHT J DATE : 22nd November, 2021 P.C. : S. O. to 06/12/2021 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1031 OF 2020 Chinmay Prashant Jagtap APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr. Sandeep Shinde a/w Mr. Pravin Mengane i/b Prashant P Patil for Applicant Ms. P.N.Dabholkar APP for Respondent State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIRENDRASINGH GYANSINGH BISHT J DATE : 6th December, 2021 P.C. : Arguments are concluded. Judgment/ order is reserved. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1031 OF 2020 Chinmay Prashant Jagtap … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents Mr. Sandeep D. Shinde a/w Mr. Pravin Mengane i/b Mr. Prashant Patil, for the Applicant. Ms. P. N.Dabholkar, APP, for the State-Respondent. CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J. RESERVED ON : 6th December, 2021. PRONOUNCED ON : 15th December, 2021. PC:- . The present application has been moved by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in C.R. No. 476 of 2017 registered with Karad Taluka Police Station, District-Satara for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 It is the case of prosecution that informant is uncle of deceased Prathamesh Sanjay Sankpal, who was a student of 12th standard Rekha Patil 1/5 studying in Y.C.College of Science at Vidyanagar, Karad. The applicant and two more students, who are stated to be juveniles in conflict with law, were also studying in the same college. On 17/11/2017 the deceased left his house for college as there was examination but did not return. 3 The prosecution alleges that the relations between the deceased and the applicants and other co-accused were not cordial and therefore, on 17/11/2017 at about 4-00 p.m. they committed murder of the deceased in the area known as 'Bhatki Shiva' near railway line in the vicinity of village Parle, Taluka Karad by means of knife and scythe. Accordingly FIR came to be lodged. 4 Mr. Shinde, learned Counsel for the applicant, submits that there was college rivalry between the deceased and the applicant and another. Although it is alleged that the deceased was assaulted by means of a knife on head, face and neck but those injuries did not match with the findings of Postmortem Report. Although the charge-sheet has been filed but trial is yet to be commenced. Having regard to the circumstance and as also age of the applicant, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. Rekha Patil 2/5 5 Ms. Dabholkar, learned APP, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the submissions by contending that there is statement of eye witness, namely, Yogesh Tanaji Shedge who had witnessed the incident and even the deceased himself had confided to Vishwajit @ Vishu Krushnarao Pawar on 17/11/2017 that he is likely to be beaten. Besides, the Postmortem Report also point out the injuries sustained by the deceased which is quite in consonance with the theory of prosecution. There is no inconsistency between findings of Postmortem Report and theory of prosecution as is claimed by learned counsel for the applicant. According to learned APP, since the deceased was mercilessly killed the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 6 Perused investigation papers. First of all, I may from the FIR point out that the informant has clearly stated that there were injury marks on the head and neck of the deceased by means of a sharp weapon. Column No. 17 of the Postmortem Report clearly shows that there were multiple superficial to deep incised wounds over scalp, face and neck. Thus apparently there is no inconsistency, except wound on face, between the case of prosecution and finding of the Postmortem Report as canvased before me by learned Counsel for the applicant. 7 This brings me to the statements of eye witness viz. Kiran @ Ganesh Shivaji Thorat. From the statement of this witness it is very much clear that he witnessed the whole incident. According to this witness, the hands of deceased was caught hold of by accused Vijay while the applicant took out a scythe from his sack which was given to him by accused Vijay only and then gave a blow on the head of the deceased as a result of which deceased fell down. Even thereafter the applicant gave three blows of scythe on the neck of the deceased. After the deceased died, the applicant threatened the others including the witnesses that if any of them disclosed the incident they would be similarly done to death. His statement further shows that because of threats given by the applicant and as he is of hot temperament, this witness did not tell about the incident to anybody. Incidentally, I may note from the Postmortem Report that the cause of death was " Head injury due to multiple incised wounds associated with fracture skull bone". 8 One more statement is that of Vishwajit @ Vishu Krushnarao Pawar. It appears that on 17/11/2017 when witness had been to college for examination, deceased called him and expressed his apprehension that he would be beaten by the boys. When this witness Rekha Patil 4/5 enquired with him as to who were those boys, the deceased replied that he would tell later on. At about 3-30 p.m. this witness saw applicant and other accused and as also the deceased standing in front of them. 9 From the above, it is clear that the witness, namely, Vishwajit @ Vishu Krushnarao Pawar had seen the applicant and other accused in the company of the deceased immediately before the incident. It is also pertinent to note that the deceased had expressed his apprehension of his being beaten at the hands of boys though he did not name those boys. However, immediately thereafter incident took place and it appears that those boys were applicant and others which is more than clear from the statement of Kiran @ Ganesh Shivaji Thorat. 10 From the above, I find that there is overwhelming evidence. The injured was brutally killed by the applicant by means of scythe. I do not find merit in the application. Hence, the following order. ORDER Bail Application No. 1031 of 2020 is rejected. REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Digitally signed by REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2021.12.15 12:42:49 +0530 Rekha Patil 5/5 (V. G. BISHT, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 3rd June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. stand over to 26/06/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ….... Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for Applicant. Ms.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 14th JUNE, 2019 P.C. : Learned APP seeks time to take instructions regarding health condition of the Applicant. Time as prayed for is granted. Stand over to 28/06/2019. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Anand S Patil For Applicant A.A.Takalkar APP for State/Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 28th June, 2019 P.C. : Mentioned. At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 03/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 3rd July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 26/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Anand S Patil For Applicant S.H.Yadav APP for State/Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 11th July, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 25/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 25th July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 21/08/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 21st August, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned.Stand over to 11/09/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 11th September, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 07/10/2019 . 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 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 7th October, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 14/11/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 14th November, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 03/12/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Shekhar Ingawle i/b. Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. …... …... Mrs.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : DECEMBER 17, 2019. P.C. : Learned Counsel for the Applicant tendered medical certificate dated 10th December, 2019. Same is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. Learned APP seeks time to take instructions. Stand over to 6th January, 2020. To be listed High on Board. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Shekhar Ingawale i/b.Anand S Patil For Applicant A.A.Takalkar APP for State/respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 6th January, 2020 P.C. : Learned APP seeks time to take instructions. S.O. to 08/01/2020 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 30: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Shekhar Ingawle i/b. Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. …... …... Mrs.Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : JANUARY 08, 2020. P.C. : The applicant is seeking bail on medical ground for temporary period. The applicant is in custody from 10th March, 2016 in connection with C.R.No.31 of 2016, registered with Ajara Police Station, District–Kolhapur for the ofences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B and 201 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code ("IPC", for short). 2 The applicant had earlier preferred an application for bail viz. Criminal Bail Application No.1466 of 2018. By order dated 28th August, 2018, it was directed that the jail Authorities shall ensure that the applicant is taken to Chougule Neurology Centre and Nursing Home, Kolhapur, on the date and time given for the applicant's check up and examination and for follow-up, if required. It was also observed that the applicant cannot be given treatment for the ailment, which he is sufering in C.P.R. Hospital, Kolhapur or in any Government Hospital in Kolhapur. Applicant contend that he is sufering from Lumbar and Cervical Spondylosis. In pursuant to the said order, the applicant was taken to Chougule Nursing Home. Applicant relies upon the medical certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More, attached to Abhinav Nursing Home. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was examined at Chougule Nursing Home and thereafter he was referred to Orthopedic Surgeon Dr.Sanjay More, attached to Abhinav Nursing Home. The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More is produced in support of the submission that the applicant requires medical treatment and surgery, which can be performed in the private nursing home. 3 The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More mentions as follows: "This is to certify that I, the undersigned Dr.Sanjay More, have gone through the all medical reports of Mr.Amol Jayvant Pawar, 33/M, R/o. Kolhapur and referred by Dr. Sangram Chougule, Neuro Physician, Kolhapur. As he is not responding to medical line of treatment for chronic lumbar PID with Radiography, he has been advised endoscopic laminectomy and Discectomy by a team of Neurosurgeon, Orthopedic Sargon and Neuro physician as early as possible." 4 Learned APP has tendered the report of Dr.Sanjay Padhye, Medical Oficer, Kiolhapur Central Prison, Kalamba. The applicant is detained in the said jail. The said report dated 8th January, 2020 mentions that it's a report in continuation of earlier report. As per the orders of the High Court, the patient was sent to Dr.Sanjay More, MS (Ortho) D.N.R. (ortho), as per the opinion and referral request of Neurosurgeon Dr.Sangram Chougule. As per the evaluation done by them of the said patient he requires a surgical intervention to treat him. 5 The patient wants operation done in a private hospital and hence he has moved application. The patient has been evaluated by experts and also in private hospital as per the courts permission. The xerox copy of the report of the private doctor which has been referred to herein above are annexed with the report. The report dated 8th January, 2020, is taken on record and marked "X" for identifcation. The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More, tendered on the earlier occasion, is marked as "X-1", for identifcation. 5 Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that undisputedly, the treatment is not available in C.P.R. Hospital or any other Government Hospital in Kolhapur. The applicant is in custody for a period of four years. The applicant is required to undergo surgery immediately. With a view to undergo surgery and the follow-up treatment, applicant be granted bail. Learned APP relied upon the report tendered by the medical oficer, Kolhapur Central Prison. The report refers to the medical certifcate dated 10th December, 2019, issued by Dr.Sanjay More. The report confrms that the applicant has been examined by the experts. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant can be granted bail on medical ground for a period of three months. 6 Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: (i) Bail Application No.1412 of 2019, is allowed; (ii) The Applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.31 of 2016, registered with Ajara Police Station, District– Kolhapur, for the period of three months frin the date of release on medical ground on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall intimate to concerned police station the details of his place of residence, details about his hospitalization and further details about treatment or surgery undergone by him; (iv) Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence while on bail; (v) On completion of period of three months from the date of release, the applicant shall surrender before Ajara Police Station, District–Kolhapur; (vi) Bail Application stands disposed of. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3260 OF 2015 A/W CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3261 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14661 OF 2015 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ... Applicant/Appellant Vs. Smt.Shobha Babasaheb Babar & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.S.M. Dange for the Applicant/Appellant Mr.V.R. Gaikwad for Respondent Nos.1 to 6 CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: 30th SEPTEMBER, 2015 P.C.: Civil Application No.3260 of 2015 is filed for condonation of delay of 15 days in preferring the appeal. The learned Counsel for the respondent is present. He concedes to the condonation of delay. Hence, this application is allowed. Appeal be numbered. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3261 OF 2015: - By this Civil Application, the applicant / insurance Company seeks stay to the operation and execution of the impugned judgement and award dated 25.11.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satara in MACP No.535 of 2012. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the insurance company is ready to deposit the entire decretal amount alongwith interest accrued thereon, within a period of six weeks. In view of the above, interim stay granted to the operation and execution of the impugned judgement and award dated 25.11.2014 subject to the applicant depositing in the MACT, Satara the entire decretal amount alongwith interest accrued thereon, within a period of six weeks from today. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited in this Court at the time of filing of appeal shall be transferred to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Satara. Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly. (MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) CERTIFICATE Certified that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order.

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 …. Kunal Sunil Hargude ...Applicant Versus State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Rahul Kadam, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. P. N. Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent – State. Mr. A. A. Khatavkar, PSI Shikrapur Police Station present. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : th 12 October, 2022. PER COURT : Heard both sides. Stand over to 19th October, 2022. 'for passing order'. Till then the applicant shall not be arrested. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 6: 11.ABA.2821.2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Rahul S. Kadam, Advocate for applicant. MsP.N.Dabholkar, APP, for State. Mr.Tejas S. Pawar, Advocate for complainant. API V.S.Pawar, Shikrapur Police Station, present. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 19th October 2022 PC : Learned Advocate Mr.T.S.Pawar submitted that he has instructions to appear for the complainant. He undertakes to file his vakalatnama. He is permitted to appear for complainant in this application. Copy of application be served upon him by advocate for applicant. Stand over to 14th November 2022. Interim relief to continue. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) MST

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT WITH CRI-INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3722 OF 2022 In Cr. Anticipatory Bail Appln. 2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr. Adhik Kadam i/by Mr. Rahul Kadam for Applicant Mr. A. A. Palkar APP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP KASHINATH SHINDE J DATE : 14th November, 2022 P.C. : Not before the Bench of which Justice Sandeep K. Shinde is a member. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and another … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent AND ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3722 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and another … Respondents …...... …...... Mr. Ashish Vernekar for the Applicants in ABA-3496-2022. Mr. Rahul Kadam for the applicant in ABA-2821-2022. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad Patil, APP for the State. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 13 FEBRUARY 2023 P.C. :- The learned Counsel for the parties submits that the settlement talks are going on. In view thereof, stand over to 3 March 2023. Interim order to continue till next date. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Digitally signed by KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Date: 2023.02.13 18:44:52 +0530 Kanchan P Dhuri 1 / 1

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and another … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent AND ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3722 OF 2022 …...... …...... Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Ashish Vernekar for the Applicants in ABA-3496-2022. Mr. Rahul Kadam for the Applicant in ABA-2821-2022. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad Patil, APP for the State. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 3 MARCH 2023 P.C. :- At the request of the learned Counsel for the Applicants, stand over to 21 March 2023. Interim order to continue till next date. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Digitally signed by KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Date: 2023.03.04 10:25:56 +0530 Kanchan P Dhuri 1 / 1

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and anr … Applicants Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3722 OF 2022 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude … Intervenor In the matter between Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant Versus ~ ~ State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr.Satyavrat Joshi a/w Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar for the Applicant in ABA/3496/2022. …...... Mr. Rahul S. Kadam for the Applicant in ABA/2821/2022. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad Patil, APP for the Respondent – State. Ravikiran Mohan Jadhav, PH 2229, Shikrapur Police Station, Pune, present. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 21 MARCH 2023 P.C. :- At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant, stand over to 12th April, 2023. Ad-interim relief, if any, granted earlier to continue till the next date. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. )

Order - Status 17: 7-aba-3496-22 @ G.doc DINESH SADANAND SHERLA Digitally signed by DINESH SADANAND SHERLA Date: 2023.04.12 14:07:00 +0500 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil N. Hargude and anr. …Applicants V/s. State of Maharashtra & anr. ...Respondents. WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 Kunal S. Hargude …Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra ...Respondent. WITH CONNECTED INTERIM APPLICATION Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w. Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar for the Applicants in ABA 3496/22. Mr. Rahul S. Kadam for the Applicant in ABA 2821/22. Mrs.Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Tejas S. Pawar for the Intervenor. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 12.04.2023. P.C. : List on 13 June 2023. The interim order, if any, to continue till the next date. [N.R.BORKAR, J.]

Order - Status 19: VRJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude & Anr. … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3722 OF 2022 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude … Applicant the matter between In Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar for the applicant in ABA/3496/2022. Mr. Rahul S. Kadam for the applicant in ABA/2821/2022. Mr. Tejas S. Pawar for the applicnat in IA/3722/2022. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : JUNE 13, 2023 P.C.: 1. Stand over to 4 th July 2023. Ad-interim relief granted earlier to continue till 4th July 2023. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude And Anr APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR J DATE : 25th July, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 10/08/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and anr. ...Applicants vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3722 OF 2022 IN CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude ...Applicant In the matter between : Kunal Sunil Hargude ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.Samay Pawar i/b. Mr. Ashish Vernekar for the Applicant in ABA . Mrs. Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent-State. API V. S. Pawar, Shikrapur Police Station, Pune, present. CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED : 24 AUGUST 2023 P. C. : At the request of learned counsel for the applicant, stand over to 13 September 2023. Interim order, granted earlier, shall continue to operate till next date. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and Anr. … Applicants versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant versus State Of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3722 OF 2022 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude … Applicant and Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant versus State Of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Samay Pawar i/by Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar, for Applicants in ABA 3496 of 2022. Mr. Rahul S. Kadam, for Applicant in ABA 2821 of 2022. Mr. M.G.Patil, APP for State. Mr. Amol Anil Khatavkar, PSI Shikrapur Police Station present. CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J. DATE : 9 OCTOBER 2023 P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2021 This is an application for pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R.No.803 of 2022 registered with Shikrapur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 465, 467, 471 of IPC. 3**.** The Applicant Kunal is the son of Applicant No.1 Sunil in ABA No.3496 of 2022. Applicant No.2 Ganesh is the brother of Applicant No.1 Sunil and uncle of Kunal. The first informant Sunil had lodged a report against Kunal with the allegations that his relations with his wife Dwarka have been strained. Dwarka and Kunal are residing separetely. Disputes arose over the ancestral properties. A civil suit is instituted by Kunal in the Court at Shirur. Namdev, the father of Sunil and Ganesh and grand-father of Kunal was bed-ridden. Namdev passed away on 14 April 2022. The first informant alleged that after the death of Namdev, it transpired that the applicant had obtained a Power of Attorney and Agreement for sale by setting up an imposter. On the basis of the said forged documents, the applicant also got executed the sale deed in his name. After realizing the fraud, the first informant lodged the report. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3496 OF 2022 This is an application for pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R.No.1004 of 2022 registered with Shikrapur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. Subsequently, Section 307 of the IPC came to be added. Kunal lodged a report with the allegations that on 9 November 2022 while he was passing from behind John Dear Factory on Talegaon Dhamdhere to Sanaswadi Road, a car intercepted him. Three persons alighted from the said car and they boarded the first informant's car. One of those persons was armed with a knife like sharp weapon. The first informant was assaulted on his right hand. One of the assailants pointed a pistol at the neck of the first informant and threatened to shoot him if he did not return the lands to his father and uncle. The assailants declared that they were sent by the applicants – Sunil and Ganesh. Initially this Court has granted interim protection in both the matters. The learned Counsel for the Applicant in ABA 2821 of 2022 submits that the applicants have amicably resolved the disputes and the applicant – Kunal has filed an application for quashing of the prosecution. The learned Counsel for the Applicants in ABA 3496 of 2022 also submits that in view of the settlement, those applicants are also in the process of filing an application for quashing the prosecution. Evidently, the genesis of the offences is in the dispute between the father and son over the ancestral properties. It appears that a suit was instituted by the applicant – Kunal during the lifetime of his grand-father. The allegations of forgery and using the forged documents for the purpose of cheating revolve around documents. At this length of time, the custodial interrogation of the applicants does not seem to be warranted. I am, therefore, inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the applicants. Hence, the following order : ORDER ABA NO.2821 OF 2022 (i) In the event of the arrest of the Applicant – Kunal Sunil Hargude in connection with C.R.No.803 of 2022 registered with Shikrapur Police Station, the Applicant be released on bail on furnishing a PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. (ii) The Applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and report to Shikrapur Police Station on 16th, 17th and 18 October 2023 in between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. (iii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or give threat or inducement to the first informant or any of the prosecution witnesses or any of the persons acquainted with the facts of the case. (iv) The Applicant shall produce all the original documents which are in his SSP 4/6 custody before the Investigating Officer. (v) The Applicant shall also submit his specimen handwriting and signature to the Investigating Officer. (vi) The Applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court. ABA NO.3496 OF 2022 (vii) In the event of the arrest of the applicants – Sunil Namdev Hargude and Ganesh Namdev Hargude in connection with C.R.No.1004 of 2022 registered with Shikrapur Police Station, they be released on bail on furnishing a PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. (viii) The Applicants shall co-operate with the investigation and report to Shikrapur Police Station on 19th, 20th and 21st October 2023 in between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. (ix) The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or give threat or inducement to the first informant or any of the prosecution witnesses or any of the persons acquainted with the facts of the case. (x) The Applicants shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court. (xi) The applications stand disposed. (xii) The Interim application also stands disposed. (xiii) It is clarified that these prima facie observations are confined to determine entitlement to pre-arrest bail only. ( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1264 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1546 OF 2010 M.C.G.M. ..Applicant v/s. Ganga Timappa & Ors. ..Respondents ALONGWITH CAF/1265/2018 IN FA/1547/2010 CAF/1266/2018 IN FA/1548/2010 CAF/1267/2018 IN FA/1549/2010 CAF/1268/2018 IN FA/1550/2010 CAF/1269/2018 IN FA/1551/2010 CAF/1270/2018 IN FA/1552/2010 CAF/1271/2018 IN FA/1553/2010 CAF/1272/2018 IN FA/1554/2010 CAF/1273/2018 IN FA/1555/2010 CAF/1274/2018 IN FA/1556/2010 CAF/1275/2018 IN FA/1557/2010 CAF/1276/2018 IN FA/1558/2010 CAF/1277/2018 IN FA/1559/2010 CAF/1278/2018 IN FA/1560/2010 CAF/1279/2018 IN FA/1561/2010 CAF/1292/2018 IN FA/1562/2010 Mr. N.V.Walawalkar, Sr. Adv. a/w. Madhuri More for the Applicant-BMC.. CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : 02 APRIL, 2018. P.C. Not on board. On production, taken on board. Interim relief granted by earlier Order dated 8th February, 2018 to continue till the next date of hearing. Stand over to 11th June, 2018. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1264 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1546 OF 2010 The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay … Applicant V/s. Ganga Timmappa & Anr. … Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1265 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1547 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1266 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1548 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1267 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1549 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1268 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1550 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1269 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1551 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1270 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1552 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1271 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1553 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1272 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1554 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1273 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1555 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1274 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1556 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1275 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1557 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1276 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1558 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1277 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1559 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1278 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1560 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1279 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1561 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1292 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1562 OF 2010 Mr.N.V. Walawalkar, Senior Advocate a/w. Ms.M.R. Bhoir for the Applicant. Ms.Megha S. Bajoria i/b. Mr.Kuldeep S. Patil for Respondent No.2. CORAM : DR.SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J. DATE : 8th JUNE, 2018. P.C. : 1] All these 17 Civil Applications are filed for condonation of delay of 44 days in taking out the present application for restoration against Respondent No.1. 2] It is submitted that the notice of this application could not be served by regular mode on Respondent No.1, as the structure is demolished and Respondent No.1 has re-shifted his residence and therefore, the permission is sought to serve the notice by way of substituted service by publication thereof in one English as well as one Marathi newspaper namely "Free Press Journal" and "Navshakti" or such other papers as this Court deem fit. 3] Considering the ground made of non service of Respondent No.1 by regular mode, these Applications are allowed in terms of prayer Clause (b) for service of notice on Respondent No.1 by publication in the local newspapers having circulation in the area of Mumbai. 4] Accordingly, the order of ad-interim relief, which is granted by this Court on 2nd April, 2018 and which was continued till 3/4 11th June, 2018 is directed to be continued till 16th August, 2018, in view of the issuance of the notice to Respondent No.1. 5] It is clarified that the matter is adjourned for return of the notice to 7th August, 2018 and the order of ad-interim relief, granted earlier, is extended till 16th August, 2018. 6] Stand over to 7th August, 2018. [DR.SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.]

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8650 OF 2003 Union of India & Ors. ...... Petitioners. v/s Chandrabhan R. Shinde & Anr. ...... Respondents. Mr. Y.S. Bhate with Mr. N.R. Prajapati i/b Mr. K.B. Rao for the Petitioners. Mr. Saikumar Ramamurthy for respondent No.1. ----- CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & V.M. KANADE, JJ. DATE : 24th March, 2008. P.C.: By this Petition, the Petitioner - Union of India is challenging the judgment and order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.734 of 2001 whereby the application filed by respondent No.1 is allowed and the order dated 17/09/2001 which was passed by the Petitioner was quashed and set aside and it was held that the applicant/respondent No.1 was entitled to receive pension in view of revision of pension by the Vth Pay Commission. Brief facts in nutshell are as under:- The respondent No.1, initially, was working as Labour Officer in Western Railway with effect from 24/10/1952 to 20/09/1963. Thereafter, he worked as Labour Officer under the Chief Labour Officer and as Assistant Labour Officer from 1963 to 1979 and, thereafter, he joined the International Airport Authority which is a Public Sector Undertaking and came to be absorbed therein with effect from 02/04/1979. Some time in February, 1984 the respondent No.1 was sanctioned pro-rata pension of Rs 297/- per month by the Ministry of Labour with effect from 02/04/1979. Initially, the applicant opted to commute 1/3rd of his pension in February, 1984 i.e. Rs 99/- out of Rs 297 and received an amount of Rs, 14,671.80. On 24/03/1984, he again opted to commute balance 2/3rd of the monthly pension i.e. Rs 198/- and received Rs 29,343.60. Respondent No.1's services in Western Railway, however, were allowed to be counted for the purpose of pension and, consequently, pension was revised to Rs 498/- with effect from 02/04/1979 vide order dated 02/07/1985. Thereafter, in view of the IVth Pay Commission his pension was again revised with effect from 01/01/1986 to Rs 1138/- deducting Rs 297/- which he had commuted in 1984. After the Vth Pay Commission, the respondent No.1's pension was further directed to be revised vide order dated 29/07/1999 and it was revised to Rs 3,443/-. However the respondent No.1's pension was suddenly stopped by the order dated 04/10/2000 and, 2 therefore, he filed Original Application No.861 of 2000. The said Original Application was allowed by order dated 19/03/2001 and a direction was given to the petitioner to issue notice to the respondent No.1 and, thereafter, take a decision. Accordingly a fresh notice was issued to the respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 filed his representation and, thereafter, the impugned order was passed against the petitioner. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner - Union of India submitted that the Tribunal had clearly erred in passing the impugned order. He submitted that the respondent No.1 having commuted his entire pension on 24/03/1984 was not entitled to get the revised pension. He invited our attention to Rule 6 of Central Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 and also Rule 10 of the said Rules. The submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner cannot be accepted. It is apparent that what was commuted by the respondent No.1 was pension to the tune of Rs 297/- only and not the entire pension of Rs 498/-. The Tribunal has reproduced the application dated 24/03/1984 and on the basis of this application, the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the respondent No.1 never had any intention of commuting the revised pension of Rs 498/- per month. In our view, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. The 3 Tribunal, after having considered the relevant rules and the facts of the case, has recorded a finding in favour of respondent No.1. It is a well settled position in law that while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, the High Court is not entitled to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal of competent jurisdiction even if a wrong finding is given. In the present case, we are of the view that the finding recorded by the Tribunal has to be confirmed in view of the admitted position that the respondent No.1 had commuted total amount of Rs 297/- out of the revised pension of Rs 498/- per month and, as such, the respondent No.1 was entitled to the revision made by IVth Pay Commission and Vth Pay Commission on the said balance amount and the impugned order passed by the Petitioner - Union of India was, therefore, rightly set aside by the Tribunal. Hence, there is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Under the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. (D.K. DESHMUKH, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)