All Cases

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9881 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9880 OF 2016 Dipak Anandrao Jadhav & Ors. Petitioners Versus Assistant Registrar Co­operative Society Respondents Koregaon & Ors. Mr. Vaibhav R. Gaikwad for petitioners. Mr. S.B.Kolel, AGP for respondent no.1. CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 16, 2016 P.C. . Not on board. At the request of Advocate for the petitioners, the matter is taken on board for extension of time to remove all office objections as per earlier order dated 22nd August, 2016. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners and the earlier order dated 22nd August, 2016, time is extended till 30th September, 2016 to remove all office objections, failing which writ petition shall stand dismissed without referring back to the Court. Office is directed to place the matter on board on 3rd October, 2016. (K.K.TATED, J.)

Order - Status 8: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9881 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9880 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Court's or Judge's orders Registrar's orders None present. CORAM : R. M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDLI) Date : 05 OCTOBER 2016 Await service to Respondent No. 3 for five weeks i.e. 16.11.2016. REGISTRAR (JUDLI)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9880 OF 2016 Mahadeo Anandrao Jadhav And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Assistant Registrar, Co.operative Society And ....Respondent WITH Ors WRIT PETITION NO. 9881 OF 2016 Dipak Anandrao Jadhav And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Assistant Registrar, Co.operative Society And Ors ....Respondent Shri Vaibhav Ramchandra Gaikwad, Adv For Petitioner Shri Sachin Kankal, AGP for Respondent/ State CORAM : R.M. SAVANT., J DATE : 16th November, 2016 P.C. : Stand over to 23/11/2016. To be listed alongwith W P No.9881/2016. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9880 OF 2016 Mahadeo Anandrao Jadhav And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Assistant Registrar, Co.operative Society And ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9881 OF 2016 Dipak Anandrao Jadhav And Ors ....Petitioner V/S Assistant Registrar, Co.operative Society And Ors ....Respondent Vaibhav Ramchandra Gaikwad Petitioner no. 1 To 3 Mr. Bodke For Respondent S.D. Rayrikar AGP For State CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 5th September, 2018 P.C. : Ors Stand Over to 27/09/2018 on Supplementary Board. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER --- CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : 4th September, 2013 P.C. : On account of paucity of time, the following matters on the daily board stand adjourned on the dates fixed as per the CMIS. --- Sr.Nos. Adjourned Date 06,09,10,17,20,36,37,38,40,41,42,44 16/09/2013 12,13,14,15,16,43 17/09/2013 19, 22, 23 08/10/2013 24,26,27,28,29,31,32,33,34,35,45 10/10/2013 25 24/09/2013 39 27/04/2013 46,47,48 19/09/2013 49, 50 20/09/2013 If any ad-interim or interim relief granted in the aforesaid matters is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the dates which are fixed under this order. If there is an extreme urgency, the parties can get the papers produced before the Court.

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1939 OF 2013 Ganesh Arjun Ghadage And Ors. ..Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. Vivek Salunke Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. D.R. More, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI, J. DATED : DECEMBER 18, 2013. P. C.: . Heard learned Counsel Mr. Vivek Salunke for the Petitioners and Mr. D.R. More, A.P.P. for the State. Issue notice to Respondent No.2 returnable on 15 January 2014. (M.L.TAHALIYANI, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1939 OF 2013 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders None for the Petitioner Mr. D. R. More APP for the State. CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J. DATED : JANUARY 24, 2014 P.C. : None present for the Petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner shall furnish a complete spare to the Office within one week from today. Upon furnishing spare copy, Office to issue fresh notice to the Respondent. Notice returnable 4 weeks. (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.)

Order - Status 12: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1939 OF 2013 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Rupesh Zade h/f. Mr. Pravin Dubade, advocate for Petitioner. Mr. A.S. Shitole, APP for State. CORAM :SMT.SADHANA S. JADHAV , J DATE :JUNE 9, 2014 P.C.: 1 Stand over to 23/6/2014. Pendency of this Writ Petition shall not be construed as a stay to the trial in Special Case No. 25/2011 pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati. Office to communicate this order to the concerned court. ( SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV , J) ..... Talwalkar 1/1

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1939 OF 2013 Ganesh Arjun Ghadage and others .....Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra and another ....Respondents Mr. Vivek Salunke for Petitioner Mr. Rupesh Zade for Respondent Mr. A. S. Shitole APP for the State. CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J. DATED : JUNE 23, 2014 PC : Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. Petitioner herein had filed an application seeking relief that Special Case No. 25 of 2011 be tried along with R.C.C. No. 32 of 2012. The said application was rejected by the Sessions Court on the ground that the incident reported in R.C.C. No. 32 of 2012 is not arising out of the same incident and therefore, application seeking clubbing of the cases was rejected. Hence, this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge is not yet framed. However, it appears from the charge-sheet that there are allegations against present petitioners under the provisions of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and therefore, petitioner would have to be tried by the Special Court. In that case, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused in R.C.C. No. 166 of 2011 should also be tried by the Special Court. However, as against them, there are no allegations under the provisions of the Special Act and therefore, they would have to be tried by the Court of Magistrate. In view of this, petition stands disposed of. (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.)

Order - Status 5: Ladda IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION No. 873 of 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe .. Applicant. Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. H.P. Ingle I/by Mr. Prashant Goyal Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the State. CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J. DATE : 15th May, 2017. (VACATION JUDGE) P.C. The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with investigation of Crime No. 8 of 2017 registered with Meghwadi Police Station, Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai under Section 406, 420 of IPC. On hearing the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP, it appears that earlier there was First Information Report (FIR) lodged by Abhishek Rai on 6th November, 2016 bearing Crime No. 288 of 2016 registered with Police Station, Vanrai, Mumbai on similar allegations in which the applicant had approached this Court by filing ABA No. 288 of 2017. This Court on 5th May, 2017 has granted interim protection to the applicant on certain conditions. A perusal of the First Information Report in the present case would show that the allegations by and large are similar. The FIR was lodged by Mr. Rohit Sonik. The applicant is alleged to have committed misappropriation and breach of trust in respect of mobile handsets worth Rs.2,01,666/-. Considering the fact that in respect of similar allegations this Court had granted interim protection, the following order is passed: (i) By way of an interim relief, it is directed that in the event of arrest in connection with investigation of Crime No. 8 of 2017, Meghwadi Police Station, the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount; (ii) The applicant shall attend the Investigating Officer on Monday and Friday between 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. and as and when required by the Investigating Officer; and (iii) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency and shall not tamper or influence the prosecution witnesses. Stand over to 8th June, 2017. (C.V. BHADANG,J)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.873/2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe Applicant vs State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Hemant Ingle i.b Mr.Prashant Goyal for Applicant Mr.A.R.Kapadnis APP for State CORAM : PRAKASH D.NAIK, J. DATE : 8 JUNE 2017 P.C. By an order dated 15.5.2017 interim protection was granted to the Applicant. The Applicant was directed to attend the police station. The Advocate for the Applicant submitted that he has complied with the said directions. The learned APP submitted that the Investigating Officer is not present and he would like to take instructions in the matter. In view of the said circumstances, stand over to 28.6.2017. Ad interim order granted earlier to continue till then. (PRAKASH D.NAIK, J)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 …... …... Aditya Dilip Bagwe .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Prashant Goyel, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.A.R.Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent – State. P.I. More, Meghwadi Police Station, present. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : JUNE 28, 2017. P.C. : The applicant was granted interim protection vide order dated 15th May, 2017. There was a condition to attend the investigating officer on Monday and Friday. Learned APP on instructions submits that the applicant has not complied with the condition of reporting. It is further submitted that the applicant has given false address and he was not traceable at the given address. Learned advocate for the applicant seeks time to take instruction. Hence, stand over to 7th July, 2017. 2 Interim relief granted earlier to continue till then. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent …... Mr.Prashant Goyal, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.A.R. Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : JULY 25, 2017. …... P.C. : Stand over to 7th August, 2017. 2 This matter to be heard along with Anticipatory Bail Application No.288 of 2017. 3 Interim relief granted earlier to continue till then. 4 The applicant shall attend Meghwadi Police Station, Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai, on Saturday 29th July, 2017 between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 670 OF 2017 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Ahishek Rai ...Intervener IN THE MATTER BETWEEN : Aditya Dilip Bagwe ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Prashant Goyal for the Applicant Mr. Ajay Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent-State Mr. S. C. Singh for the Intervener CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. MONDAY, 7th AUGUST, 2017 P.C. : Learned Counsel for the applicant to furnish a copy of the application being Criminal Application No. 288 of 2017 on the learned Counsel for the intervener on or before 11th August, 2017. Stand over to 16th August, 2017. Interim protection to continue till the next date. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 18th August, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time stand over to 07/09/2017. 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 CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 7th September, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time stand over to 25/09/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 25th September, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time stand over to 12/10/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe …Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICTION NO.670 OF 2017 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Abhishek Rai Intervener. In the matter between Aditya Dilip Bagwe Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. Respondents Mr. Shrinivas Singh i/b S.I.Singh for Intervener Mr.Hemant Ingale i/b Prashant Goyal for the applicant Ms.P.P.Shinde, APP for the State CORAM: A.M. BADAR, J. DATED: 12th OCTOBER, 2017 PC: Mr. Shrinivas Singh appears for the Intervener. At the request of the parties stand over to 16th November 2017. In the meanwhile interim order to continue. (A.M. BADAR, J )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : A.M. BADAR, J DATE : 16th November, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 11/12/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 WITH APPP NO. 670 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra . … Respondent Mr. Hemant Ingle i/b Prashant Goyal for Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for State. Mr. Nitin Dalvi for Intervener. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 16th JANUARY 2018. P.C.: 1] At the request of learned Counsel for the applicant, stand over to 23rd January 2018. Interim relief to continue till then. (A.S.GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 29: Nalawade IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.670 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ..Applicant. vs. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent. Mr. Sugat i/by Prashant Goyal for the Applicant in ABA No.873/2017 and ABA No.288/2017. Mr.Nitin Dalvi i/by Shweta Singh for the Applicant in APPP No.670/2017. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP. for the State. CORAM: A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 6th February, 2018. P.C. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Advocate on record is not keeping well and is unable to attend the Court today. At his request, S.O. to 20.2.2018. Interim relief to continue till then. (A.S.GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 31: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ..Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. T.N. Khandare i/b Prashant Goyal for Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for State. Mr. Nitin Dalvi for Original Complainant. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 20th FEBRUARY 2018. P.C.: 1] Applicant is directed to attend the Investigating Officer from 22nd February 2018 to 25th February 2018 between 10.00 a.m to 2.00 p.m and to join in the process of investigation. 2] Stand over to 1st March 2018. Interim relief to continue till then. (A.S.GADKARI, J.) 1/1

Order - Status 32: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ..Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. T.N. Khandare i/b Prashant Goyal for Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for State. Mr. Nitin Dalvi for Original Complainant. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 20th FEBRUARY 2018. P.C.: 1] Applicant is directed to attend the Investigating Officer from 22nd February 2018 to 25th February 2018 between 10.00 a.m to 2.00 p.m and to join in the process of investigation. 2] Stand over to 1st March 2018. Interim relief to continue till then. (A.S.GADKARI, J.) 1/1

Order - Status 34: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 23rd March, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 02/04/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 36: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 2nd April, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 17/04/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 38: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 17th April, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 26/04/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 40: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 26th April, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 06/06/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 42: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ….Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra ….Respondent. Mr. Sugat Ingale i/by Hemant Ingale for the Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar APP, for the RespondentState. Mr. Nitin Dalvi for the intervenor. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 25th JUNE, 2018. P.C.: It is submitted that the Advocate on record is in personal difficulty and is unable to attend the Court today. 2 At the request of the learned counsel, stand over to 11th July, 2018 for hearing. (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 46: Santosh IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagve Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Mr. Prashant Goyal, for the Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM: A. S. GADKARI, J DATED: 11th JULY, 2018 PC: 1. By an order dated dated 15th May, 2017, the applicant was granted interim relief. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP. Perused the record of investigation. The first information report is lodged by Mr. Rohit Sonik on 7th January, 2017. 2. It is the precise prosecution case against the applicant that, the applicant after gaining confidence of the first informant, took delivery of handsets/mobile phones of Vivo company amounting to Rs.2,01,666/ for sale and thereafter neither returned the said handsets nor paid the 1/3 4-ABA873-17.DOC consideration for the same. That the applicant thereafter did not contact to the first informant. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that this is pure and simple civil transaction. He submitted that the applicant has already repaid the amount to the first informant. He submitted that Mr. Rajesh Singh, the partner of Abhishek Rai had been to his shop for collecting the cash towards sale of mobile phones and as the applicant was unable to repay the amount to Mr. Rajesh Singh, he took away all the mobile phones, which were kept for display in the shop. He further submitted that the applicant did not have the said mobile phones as the same have been forcibly taken away by Mr. Rajesh Singh and therefore the applicant could not return the said handsets to the first informant. He, therefore, prayed that the applicant may be granted the prearrest bail. 4. The record of investigation indicates that apart from the first informant herein, there are other five other victims in the present crime, who have been cheated by the applicant by adopting similar modus operendi to the tune of 2/3 approximately Rs.21,07,000/ (Rs. Twenty one lakhs seven thousand only). This Court by an order dated 11th July, 2018 has rejected Anticipatory Bail Application No. 288 of 2017 preferred by the applicant in CR No.288 of 2016 registered with Vanrai police station, Mumbai wherein also similar modus operendi was adopted by the applicant. 5. After taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, the serious allegations against the applicant and the gravity of the offence, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant does not deserve to be protected by prearrest bail. 6. The application is accordingly rejected. [A. S. GADKARI, J.] Santosh Subhash Kulkarni Digitally signed by Santosh Subhash Kulkarni Date: 2018.07.16 11:16:06 +0530

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3800 OF 2012 Smt. Lalita Atmaprakash Rajpal & Anr. ..Petitioners. Versus Jitendrasingh R. Kushawaha and Others. ..Respondents. Mr. Motkari i/b Ms. Archana Khan for the Petitioner. Mr. Vaibhav A. Sugadare for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : August 23, 2012 . P. C. : Heard. The writ petition arises out of the proceedings under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. At the instance of Respondent, eviction decree is passed against the Petitioner by the learned trial Court on the ground of non user, nuisance, additions and alternations. The Petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate bench of the Small Causes Court. The appeal is admitted and interim stay is also granted. In this appeal, the Respondent-landlord took out an application for direction to the Petitioner to deposit market rent of the suit premises. This application is allowed and the learned appellate Court directed the Petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.6,000/- per month towards the compensation for the use and occupation of the suit premises. The area of the suit premises is 320 sq. ft., which is being used for residential purposes. The premises are situated at Crawford Market area, which is the busiest locality. The learned appellate Court considered the age and condition of the building in which the premises are situated and also took into consideration the locality of premises. The Court also considered the valuer's report and fixed the compensation at Rs.6,000/- per month. In my view, in the facts and circumstances of the case, compensation of Rs.6,000/- cannot said to be exorbitant. I do not find any merit in the petition and same is accordingly dismissed. At the request of learned counsel for the Petitioner, time to deposit arrears of compensation as per the impugned order, is extended by three months from today. (RANJIT MORE, J.)

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.171 OF 2008 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (STAMP) NO.15932 OF 2008 ------------------------------------:---------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court's or Judge's orders. coram, appearances, Court's orders : or directions and Registrar's : orders. : ------------------------------------:----------------------------------- Mr.V.S.Kapse for the appellant. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ DATED: 15th July, 2008. P.C.: . Heard Mr.Kapse, learned counsel for the applicant-husband. Issue notice to the respondent-wife, returnable after ten weeks. In addition, to normal mode of service, Mr.Kapse is at liberty to issue advocate's notice to the respondent but under Registered Post A.D and shall also file affidavit of service on the next date. (D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Civil Application No.171 of 2008 In Family Court Appeal Stamp No.15932 of 2008 Mr.Vinay Applicant Prahaladrai Poddar Vs. Mrs.Rachana Respondent Vinay Poddar Mr.Abhijit V. Rane i/b. Mr.V.S. Kapse for applicant. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE,JJ. September 23, 2008. P.C. .Heard Mr.Rane holding for Mr.Kapse, the learned counsel for the applicant - husband. The notice issued to the respondent - wife has been returned by the postal authorities with the remark "Refused" and the postal envelope is placed on record. .This is an application praying for condonation of delay caused in filing Family Court Appeal under Stamp No.15932 of 2008. .As per the office note the appeal is beyond time by 64 days and we are satisfied that the delay caused deserves to be condoned subject to payment of costs. .Hence the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to payment of costs quantified at Rs.500/- and to be remitted to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority within two weeks from today. .List the appeal for admission on 13th October (D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.92 OF 2011 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.93 OF 2009 Deepak Balkrishna Vahikar and another ..Petitioners. vs. The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents. And Devdeep Properties ..Applicant. Ms. Vrunda Surve with Ms. S.P. Potbhare i/b Mr. Priten P. Killedar for the Petitioners. Mr. Vinay A. Sonpal, A panel counsel for Respondents 1 and 4. Dr. Sadhna Mahashabde for Respondents 2 and 3 Mr. Sameer Khale for the Applicant. ...... .... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. 8 July 2011. P.C. : The Applicant seeks permission to cut 2 trees. The report of the expert committee is on record. We grant permission to the Applicant subject to the following conditions: (a) The Applicant shall file a written undertaking of an authorized representative stating (i) That in compliance with the report of the expert committee, three new trees shall be planted for every existing tree to be felled; (ii) That the trees to be replanted shall be of local species; (iv)The trees which are to be replanted shall not be small saplings, but shall be half grown trees of a sufficient growth which shall ensure their survival; and (v) The Applicant shall continue to maintain the aforesaid trees for a period of two years after the transplantation or, as the case may be, uprooting of the trees. (b) A copy of the undertaking shall be supplied to the Petitioner and to the Municipal Corporation and shall be placed on the record of these proceedings within a period of two weeks from today; (c) The Tree Officer of the Pune Municipal Corporation shall be personally responsible for verifying as to whether the undertakings which have been furnished to the Court have been duly complied with. The Tree Officer shall bring to the notice of the Court any dereliction on the part of the deponent in complying with the undertaking. Subject to the undertaking being filed in the aforesaid terms and conditional thereon, the Civil Application is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) (Anoop V. Mohta J.)