All Cases

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.523 OF 2008 Yeshwant Prabhakar Meshram & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs. The Hon'ble Registrar, District Court, Chandrapur & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.P.P.Thakare i/b D.D. Fulzele for the petitioners Mr.V.S.Masurkar, G.P. for the respondents CORAM : J.N.PATEL & SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. DATED : 25TH JANUARY, 2008 P.C.: Heard. These two petitioners have approached this court seeking a declaration that they are entitled for being considered for the candidature for selection and entitled to appear for the written examination to be held on 27.1.08 for the post of Clerk and Peon respectively on the establishment of District and Sessions Court, Chandrapur and therefore, this court should direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear for the written examination to be held on 27.01.2008. In view of the fact that the examinations are going to be held on 27.01.2008, we called upon the learned G.P. to get instructions from the Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur. Accordingly, the communication received in respect of both the candidates from the Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur is placed on record. Copies are furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioners. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned G.P. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are eligible in all respects and qualify for being considered for appointment to the post of Clerk and Peon respectively. 2 The communication received from the Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in respect of Petitioner, Yashwant Prabhakar Meshram clearly indicates that he has not filled in the required information and therefore, his application form came to be rejected as the advertisement clearly provides for want of complete information, the application form will not be considered and will be rejected. Similarly, in case of Bhimrao Maroti Undirwade, he not only failed to provide the necessary information but also did not calculate his age correctly. Well, the incorrect calculation of age will not make any difference but the other deficiencies are of substantial nature. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances, we find that as the petitioners have failed to furnish the required information which is of substantial nature, for this deficiency the respondent Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur was justified in rejecting their application. As such, the petition is dismissed. 3 The communication received from the Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in respect of the petitioners be retained on record and marked 'X' collectively for identification. ( J.N. PATEL, J ) ( SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3720 OF 2003 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. OF 2003 Balbirsingh Hansa Singh ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents .... Mr.S.D.Nangre for applicant Mr.T.R.Yadav i/b Mr.S.V.Marwadi for Respondent nos.2 to 6. .... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : OCTOBER 3, 2005 P.C. Heard both sides. Sufficient cause has been made out for condonation of delay. Hence, delay is condoned. Application is disposed of. [V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELALTE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 358 OF 2009 Sou. Ushadevi Sambhaji Patil ...... Applicant. V/s The State of Maharashtra ....... Respondent. Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel with Mr. Niranjan Mundargi for the applicant. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.359 OF 2009 Shri Sambhaji Anandrao Patil ....... Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra ...... Respondent. Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel with Mr. Niranjan Mundargi for the applicant. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 17 th February, 2009 P.C.: Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants and the learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with the offence punishable under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that the present applicants have defrauded depositors to the tune of Rs 8,27,27,308/. In the affidavit in reply filed by the State it is stated that loans have been given to fictitious and bogus persons who are not in existence. Taking into consideration the allegations which are levelled in the complaint and the affidavit in reply filed by the State, no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. Both these applications for anticipatory bail are accordingly rejected. Both these applications are disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.414/2009 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.359/2009 Office notes,Office Memoranda of Coram Appearances,Court's orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Court's or Judge's order Mr.Pradeep Gole for the Applicant Mr.Kharge,APP for State CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J. DATE : 7th October,2009 P.C. . The learned counsel for the applicant/ original accused submits that he has served the respondents thrice. However, despite of the service they are not appearing. This Revision Application is filed against the concurrent findings of the conviction of the Sessions Court ,Satara and the J.M.F.C. Satara. Thereby convicting the applicant for the offence punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ordering the applicant/accused to pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- .The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has already deposited . Rs.30,000/- . The Revision Application is admitted. Issue notice to the respondents. R/o 30/11/2009. The bail application is pressed. The applicant accused is released on bail of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in like amount. The bail application is disposed of. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)

Order - Status 3: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO.1323 OF 2024 Kadar Isak Khan @ Matanwala : Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents Adv. Keshav Chanvan, for the Applicant. Mr. A. R. Patil, APP for the State. CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J. DATE : 9TH FEBRUARY, 2024 P.C. : Issue notice to Respondents, returnable on 1st March, 2024. Learned APP waives notice for Respondent No.1. Notice to Respondent No.2 to be served through the Concerned Investigating Officer/Police Station. (KISHORE C. SANT, J.)

Order - Status 5: Diksha Rane 8. IA 339-24.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339/2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL 161/2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshar Chavan for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 1, 2024. P.C. : 1. I am informed that the appellant is in custody for more than 8 years. The notice has already been issued to the victim by this Court. The service report is awaited. The Investigating Officer to inform the victim the next date of hearing and that she has a right to be represented by an advocate or through legal aid. 2. Stand over to 6/3/2024 , high on board. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 161 of 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA .. APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS Mr. Keshav Chavan, for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 6, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned APP who seeks time to take instructions whether next date of hearing is communicated to the complainant in terms of order dated 01/03/2024, stand over to 07/03/2024. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshav Chavan for the applicant. Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for the State. API Lamkhade, Shil Daighar Police Station. ------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 7, 2024 P.C. : 1. Learned APP submits on instructions of the Investigating Officer that the victim though was not available at the residential address as she is presently in Uttar Pradesh, however telephonically the victim has intimated that she is in need of legal aid assistance. 2. Accordingly, Advocate Saakshat Relekar is requested to appear on behalf of the victim and assist this Court. 3. List the application on 11.03.2024 fairly high on board. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 11: Diksha Rane 19.ia.339-24.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshav Chavan for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. Adv. Saakshat Relekar for the respondent no.2 (appointed advocate). CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 11, 2024 P.C. : At the request of Mr. Saakshat Relekar, who has just been served with the copy of the appeal, stand over to 12/3/2024 . (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 14: Urmila Ingale 907-ia-339-24.doc 2024:BHC-AS:12137 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. RESPONDENTS Mr. Keshav Chavan, for the applicant. Mr.Saakshat Relekar, for respondent no.2. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 12, 2024 P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State. This is an interim application for bail in respect of the offence punishable under sections 376(2)(i), 506, 363 of the Indian Penal Code (hereafter 'IPC' for short) and under section 5(m) & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereafter referred to as "POCSO Act") registered vide C.R. No. 19 of 2016 with Daighar Police Station. The interim application is opposed by learned APP and learned counsel who has been appointed by this Court to represent the complainant. The applicant is convicted for the offence punishable under sections 5(m) & 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-. The applicant is convicted for other offences the sentence to which is to run concurrently. The applicant was arrested on 30/01/2016 and is now in custody for more than 8 years and 2 months. The applicant has undoubtedly been committed for a serious offence. The appeal has been admitted and will be heard finally in due course. The applicant has undergone custody for more than half of the sentence imposed by the trial Court up till now. Prior to the substitution of section 6 of POCSO Act with effect from 16/08/2019 substituted by Act 25 of 2019., the punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault was rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. 2/5 Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 invited my attention to the findings recorded by the trial Court. It is submitted that on the basis of the evidence on record, for cogent reasons, the trial Court has rightly convicted the applicant for such a serious offence. It is therefore submitted that the applicant is not entitled for bail and instead of enlarging the applicant on bail, the appeal itself be heard finally. My attention is invited to the decision of the Supreme Court of India in State of U.P. Vs. Sonu Kushwaha 1 to contend that the trial Court has rightly held the accused guilty of offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault punishable under section 6 of POCSO Act. My attention is also invited to the decision of the Supreme Court in 2 Nawabuddin Vs. State of Uttarakhand to submit that no leniency can be shown to an accused who has committed the offences under the POCSO Act and particularly when the same is proved by adequate evidence before a Court of law. These decisions will undoubtedly guide this Court when the appeal is finally heard on merits. It is not possible for me to hear the appeal finally at this 1 Criminal Appeal No. 1633 of 2023 dated 05/07/2023 2 Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 2022 dated 08/02/2022 stage considering the pendency of the old matters. The appeal is unlikely to be heard finally any time soon in the near future. Considering that the applicant is 70 years of age and has already undergone 8 years and 2 months of his substantive sentence, in my opinion, the applicant can be enlarged on bail. The applicant is not reported to have any criminal antecedents. Considering that the victim is residing in the same vicinity, on instructions, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant will reside outside Mumbai/ Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts. The statement is accepted. Hence, the following order :- O R D E R (a) The interim application is allowed. (b) The applicant-Kadar Isak Khan @ Matanwala in connection with C.R. No.19 of 2016 registered with Daighar Police Station shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount. (c) The applicant is permitted to furnish cash bail surety in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- for a period of 6 weeks in lieu of surety. (d) The applicant shall report to the trial Court once in a year, on the first Monday of the concerned month between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. commencing from April 2024. (e) The applicant shall not enter Mumbai/ Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts after being released on bail except for reporting to the trial Court. (f) The applicant shall inform the trial Court as well as the investigating officer the contact details as well as residential address while residing outside Mumbai/Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts. (g) The applicant shall remain present at the time of hearing of this appeal. The interim application is disposed of. I appreciate the valuable assistance rendered by Mr.Saakshat Relekar, the learned Advocate, who appeared on behalf of respondent No.2 at my request in this proceeding. His engagement be regularized by the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika & Ors. … Respondents Mr.Ram Baboo Upadhyay a/w. Mr. Santosh Kumar Dube i/b. Law Competere Consults for the Petitioner. Ms.Tanvi Kamal Deasthale i/b. Mr. Mayuresh Lagu for Respondent No. 1 Corporation. Mrs.M.P.Thakur, AGP for the State. Ms.Sai Wadke – Legal Offer of Respondent No. 1 Corporation, present in person. CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, & B.P.COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATE : 4TH FEBRUARY, 2020 P.C. : The Corporation to fle its Afdavit in Reply on 6th February, 2020. Stand over to 6th February, 2020. ( B.P.COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and others … Respondents Mr. Ram Baboo Upadhyay alongwith Mr. Santoshkumar Dube instructed by Law Competere Consultus for the Petitioner. …...... …...... Mr. Mayuresh Lagu for the Respondent-Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Tejas Deshpande for Mr. Jagdishkumar Gupta - Proposed Intervenor. CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 6, 2020. P.C. :- The Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner states that he is not pressing any allegations against Mr. Jagdish Kumar Gupta in the above Writ Petition. The statement is accepted. Stand over to 7th February, 2020. ( B.P. COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and others … Respondents …...... Mr. Ram Baboo Upadhyay alongwith Mr. Santosh Kumar Dube instructed by Law Competere Consultus for the Petitioner. Mr. Mayuresh Lagu for Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation – Respondent. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Nandkishore Deshmukh, Tahsildar, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika. Mr. Chandrakant Laxman Borse, Ward Ofcer, present. Ms. Saee Wadke, Law Ofcer, present. …...... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 7, 2020. P.C. :- Mr. Chandrakant Laxman Borse, Ward Ofcer, who is present in Court states that most of the debris which was dumped on the subject land is removed and the balance debris shown in the photographs shall be forthwith removed. He also states that the Corporation will ensure that no debri is dumped by any individual/frm/company on the subject land. The statement is accepted. The Respondents are allowed to fle Afdavit-in-rejoinder/Additional Afdavit, if any, on or before 14th February, 2020. Stand over to 14th February, 2020. ( B.P. COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and others … Respondents …...... Mr. Ram Upadhyay instructed by Law Competere Consultus for the Petitioner. Mr. Mayuresh S. Lagu for Respondent No.1. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for Respondent-State. …...... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 14, 2020. P.C. :- The Learned Advocate appearing for the Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika states that the debris has been removed in its entirety. The Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner disagree with the said statement. The Registrar ( Judicial-I) shall therefore appoint an Ofcer to visit the site on 15th February, 2020 and submit his report setting out whether any debris is found on the subject plots and submit his report to this Court on 18th February, 2020. The Ofcer appointed by the Registrar ( Judicial-I) shall co-ordinate with the Advocates for the parties, on the following numbers :- Advocate Ram Upadhyay for the Petitioner : 77383 87168 Advocate Mayuresh Lagu for the Respondent : 9821049290 2. The costs of the Commissioner shall be borne by the Petitioner. The Ofcer shall also take photographs and annex the same to his report. The representatives of the parties shall remain present when the Court Ofcer visits the subject plot. Stand over to 18th February, 2020. ( B.P. COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak ....Petitioner V/S The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahangarpalika Bhayandar And Ors ....Respondent CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 18th February, 2020 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 25/02/2020 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak ....Petitioner V/S The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahangarpalika Bhayandar And Ors ....Respondent CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA & R. I. CHAGLA, JJ DATE : 25th February, 2020 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 03/03/2020 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and Ors. … Respondents None for Petitioner. Mrs. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP, for State. CORAM: S.J. KATHAWALLA & R.I.CHAGLA, JJ. DATE: 3 rd MARCH, 2020 P.C.: None appear for the Petitioner. Since the matter is called out after 5.00 p.m., stand over to 26th March, 2020. ( R.I.CHAGLA, J. ) ( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 23: Digitally signed by Kanchan P. Dhuri Date: 2020.10.14 13:37:35 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WP-854-2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus Commissioner of Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and others … Respondents …...... Mr. Prem Upadhye alongwith Dharmesh Singh instructed by Law Competere for the Petitioner. Mr. Mayuresh Lagu for Respondent No.1. Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the State. …...... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 13, 2020. P.C. :- By the above Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks the following reliefs :- "(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondents for immediate demolition of the illegal structures/Factories/of whatsoever nature and evict the illegal occupants from the plot of lands bearing survey numbers (all Hissas and parts of ) 111, 112, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123/1, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147/2, 148, 149, 150 and 151 at village Velkaripada opposite river Laxmi of Village Chene. (b) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondents to Completely Remove debris's dumped on the plot of lands bearing survey numbers (all hissas and parts of ) 111, 112, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123/1, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147/2, 148, 149, 150 and 151 at village Velkaripada opposite river laxmi of Village Chene forthwith and bring it to its original topography as delay in removing the debris's is resulting into regular submerging of the plots and property of the inhabitant of the Velkaripada village and of the petitioner. The Costs for removal of debris be recovered from the land owners and its illegal occupants with heavy penalties and penal action. (c) This Hon'ble court be pleased to direct the respondent to remove obstructions in the Natural water fow due to closing of the water drainage constructed by the concerned authorities of the respondent No. 1 and also to properly reconstruct the Naala and provide a proper storm water drain for the water to fow through it smoothly as per Communication Report Of The Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika, Dated : 23.04.2018 Exhibit 'R' attached herewith, so as to maintain the natural surrounding and serenity of the area and avoid stagnation of water which has resulted into breeding of harmful mosquitoes and other insects and also submerging of the plots and property of the petitioners and the other inhabitants of village Velkaripada. (d) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct respondents to remove the tin sheds abutting Petitioner's property by covering the boundary wall of plot having survey number 147/1 & 3 and 123/2 and also illegal dumping of debris near the plot, same being illegal and not authorized under the law." The grievance of the Petitioner made in the Writ Petition is quite serious. Despite the Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation having assured the Court as far back as on 7th February, 2020 that they will remove the debris which was dumped on the subject land, the dumping of debris on the subject land has continued. However, today an order dated 30th September, 2020 issued by the Learned Municipal Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation is placed before us whereunder the Municipal Commissioner, after taking cognizance of the grievance of the Petitioner made in the above Writ Petition and the orders passed by the Court from time to time, has proceeded to form a Committee to consider and decide the issues set out in the said order. The Committee so constituted shall within a period of eight weeks from today, after hearing the Advocate for the Petitioner and considering the documents provided by him to the Committee, submit its report to the Municipal Commissioner setting out its views/suggestions qua the issues placed before them and the Corporation shall forthwith take steps to comply with the same. In addition to the issues set out in the order passed by the Learned Commissioner, the Committee shall also consider the allegations made by the Petitioner qua the unauthorized construction/business carried out on the subject land and set out its fndings in the report submitted to the Corporation. The above Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to fle a fresh Petition if his grievance is not resolved despite this order. This order will be digitally signed by the PA/PS of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. ( RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5258 OF 2007 Colin Douglas Hoogewere ...... ....Petitioner. V/s Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr........ ....Respondents. Mr.P.S.Dani, Adv. For the petitioner. Mr.Vikas Warerkar i/by M/s.Warerkar & Warerkar for respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 27/7/07 PC: The present petitioner is already defending proceedings under the Public Premises Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants Act, 1971 (the "Act") as an occupant of the premises. One Smt.Iris Honey was the tenant and the case of the respondentInsurance company is that the present petitioner was illegally inducted in the premises by the tenant. The proceedings are initiated under the said act against the tenant so also the present petitioneroccupant. Iris Honey expired during the pendency of proceedings on 21.5.06 and thus the present petitioner moved an application to bring his name on record as legal representative of the deceased. The rejection of the said application has given rise to the present writ petition. The relationship of the petitioner with the deceased has not been clearly spelt out even in this petition, when the application itself was rejected on the grant that the petitioner had not placed on record any material in support of relationship. As the petitioner is already defending the proceedings as occupant no prejudice will be caused if the petitioner is not brought on record as legal representative of the deceased. Perused the order. Same does not call for interference. Thus writ petition stands summarily dismissed. If and in case some other legal representative of Iris Honey is brought on record it shall be open for the petitioner to take up appropriate proceedings before appropriate Forum to litigate the rights. 27.7.07

Order - Status 5: 1 of 3 7-wp-1874-23 @ other mtrs. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1874 OF 2023 Zakir Ramzan Qureshi & Ors. ..Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1876 OF 2023 Danish Elyas Hingora ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1877 OF 2023 Zakir Ramzan Qureshi & Ors. ..Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1878 OF 2023 Zakir Ramzan Qureshi & Ors. ..Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1879 OF 2023 Danish Elyas Hingora ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date: 2023.06.07 14:48:25 +0530 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1880 OF 2023 Danish Elyas Hingora ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Ms. K. R. Shah for Petitioners in all W.Ps. Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for State/Respondent No.1 in WP/1874/23, WP/1877/23 and WP/1878/23. Mr. A. R. Patil, APP for State/Respondent No.1 in WP/1876/23, WP/1879/23 and WP/1880/23. __________ __________ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 6 JUNE 2023 PC : Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that, she has an alternate remedy of approaching the Sessions Court challenging the order of issuance of process. She seeks liberty to withdraw these petitions and to approach the Sessions Court by way of filing revision applications against the impugned order by keeping all the contentions open. Her only concern is that, because of pendency of these petitions, the revision applications may be beyond the period of limitation. Since the petitioners have already filed these petitions before this Court, pendency of these petitions before this Court shall be taken into consideration by the Sessions Court if and when the revision applications are filed by the applicants challenging the order which is impugned in all these petitions, for the purpose of consideration of period of limitation. If such proceedings are filed, they shall be decided in accordance with law. With this observation and liberty, the petitions are allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)