C. M. M. Court

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.16 OF 2015 ..... Shabu Bhimappa Dudhale ..Appellant. versus Vinayak Appasaheb Padavle and another ..Respondents. ..... Mr. Anand S. Patil for the Appellant. Smt. V.R. Bhosale , Addl.P.P. for the State. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J. 3rd July, 2015. P.C. : The Appellant to remove the office objections within a period of three weeks from today. Stand over to 24th July, 2015. (A.S. Gadkari, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 16 OF 2015 Shabu Bhimappa Dudhale ...Appellant vs. Vinayak Appasaheb Padavale and Anr. ...Respondents ***** None for the Appellant Mr. N. B. Patil - APP for the Respondent-State ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 02nd FEBRUARY, 2023 P. C. :- None present for the contesting parties, even though matter is fixed for final hearing. Matter be kept on 09th March, 2023 under the caption 'for direction'. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 10: SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Digitally signed by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2023.03.13 14:28:18 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 16 OF 2015 Shabu Bhimappa Dudhale ...Appellant vs. Vinayak Appasaheb Padavale and Anr. ...Respondents ***** Mr.Sandip Kagade i/b. Mr.Anand Patil, Advocate for Appellant. Mr.H.J.Dedhia – APP for the Respondent No.2-State. ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : th 9 MARCH, 2023 P. C. :- Learned Advocate Shri.Anand Patil is busy before some other Court. The Court of JMFC has acquitted the Accused by invoking the powers of Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ["Cr.P.C."] as per the order dated 26th December, 2012. It is for not taking steps by the Complainant. Matter be kept on 16th March, 2023. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 16 OF 2015 Shabu Bhimappa Dudhale ...Appellant vs. Vinayak Appasaheb Padavle and Anr. ...Respondents ***** Mr. S. R. Ghanavat i/by Mr. Anand S. Patil - Advocate for the Appellant Mr. H. J. Dedhia - APP for the Respondent-State ***** CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 16th MARCH, 2023 P. C. :- As learned Advocate Shri Anand S. Patil is busy before some other Court, adjournment is sought. Matter be kept on 18th April, 2023. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 15: Tauseef 12-APEAL.16.2015.doc Digitally Date: 2023.04.25 12:10:14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.16 OF 2015 Shabu Bhimappa Dudhale …Appellant Versus Vinayak Appasaheb Padavle & Anr. …Respondents Mr. Anand S. Patil for the Appellant. Mr. H. J. Dedhia, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATE : 18th APRIL, 2023 P.C. Mentioned out of turn. Learned Advocate for the Appellant seeks accommodation. The Appeal is already admitted. Matter be kept on 14 th June, 2023. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 17: HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Digitally signed by HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Date: 2023.07.28 00:34:56 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.16 OF 2015 Shabu Bhimappa Dudhale Age 56 years, Occupation-Business R/o 2114, "E" Ward, Kawala Naka Kolhapur ...Appellant vs. Vinayak Appasaheb Padavle Age 36 years, Occupation-Business R/o 823, "E" Ward, Line Bazar, Kolhapur … State of Maharashtra …Respondents Mr. Anand S. Patil for the Appellant. Mr. S. R. Agarkar APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. DATED : 18TH JULY 2023 JUDGMENT : Heard learned Advocate for the Appellant-complainant. No one is present on behalf of the Respondent-accused. Issue involved in this Appeal is as under : "Whether power under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised at post evidence stage when accused remained absent ?" 10.a16.2015.odt The appeal was already admitted on 5th December 2014. The action under Section 390 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also initiated. The Farad Sheet dated 6th June 2023, mentions that Respondent No.1-accused has furnished surety of Rs.10,000/- on 30th June 2015. However, no one has appeared in this Appeal. It is travesty of justice, that appeal involving trifle issue remained pending for eight years. Reasons may be different. Perused the impugned order dated 26th December 2012, passed by 15th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kolhapur in Summary Criminal Case No.4161 of 2006. The accused was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act by taking recourse to Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. When this order came to be passed, the matter was fixed for recording statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The complaint was filed in the year 2006 bearing SCC No.4161/06. Roznama indicates accused was in the habit of avoiding process of this Court. The following are the important dates :- January 2007 Process was issued. 17/08/2010 Non bailable warrant issued as accused remained absent. 23/03/2001 Accused produced in execution of Non bailable warrant Application for bail Plea recorded 24/03/2011 Accused released on bail. 30/03/2011 Evidence of complainant. 7/04/2011 No cross order. Close pursis. Adjourned for statement under Section 313 of the Code. 14/07/2011 Non bailable warrant issued 1/02/2012 Cash surety forfeited Issued non bailable warrant. 30/10/2012 Non bailable warrant issued through Superintendent of Police 26/12/2012 Complaint dismissed for want of taking steps. So from events what transpires is as follows :- (a) The complaint is pending since 2006. (b) Accused has no respect for law. (c) He has not responded to Court summons earlier to plea and thereafter also. (d) Trial Court was required to issue non bailable warrant on various occasions. (e) Prior to recording of plea, non bailable warrant was served and Respondent-accused was released on cash bail. (f) Non bailable warrant could not be served even through Superintendent of Police. On this background, the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 15th Court, Kolhapur passed an order dated 26/12/2012 thereby acquitting the Respondent-accused by taking recourse to the provisions of Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Magistrate noted following facts in the order :- (a) The complainant was absent persistently on 15/06/2012, 4/08/2012, 25/09/2012 and on 30/10/2012 (para 2). (b) Report of Superintendent of Police indicates that accused was outside his house (para 3). (c) Complainant has not taken steps under Section 82, 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (para 4). Now the question is whether it was appropriate for the learned Magistrate to take recourse to the provisions of Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If we read those provisions, we may find the following ingredients :- (a) Case is fixed for hearing. (b) Complainant is absent. (c) His presence is required. (d) Court does not feel it necessary to adjourn the matter. Then only complaint can be dismissed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Associated Cement Co. Ltd. Vs. Keshvanand 1 , has dealt with this issue. The purpose is to check the dilatory tactics of the complainant, principle of speedy trial is recognised. 9. However, if the entire facts and circumstances of the case are considered, there is reason to believe that the learned Magistrate has hastily passed that order. It is a matter of record that accused has no respect to the law. And on every occasion, the complainant was 1 (1998) 1 SCC 687 10.a16.2015.odt required to take steps. Execution of non bailable warrant is not an easy formality. At the same time, it is also true that unchallenged evidence could not have been used by the trial Court unless it was put to the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. At the same time, trial Court ought to have given weightage to the fact that patience of complainant was tested every time. If it is so, the trial Court waited and could have given direction to the complainant to take steps. The judgment of acquittal need not be interfered rightly. But the power under Section 256 of the Code should not be exercised only for the purpose of disposing of the cases. Trial Court has not considered the efforts taken by the complainant every time to secure presence of the complainant. The order deserves to be set aside. Certain directions for speedy disposal are required as the complaint is pending since 2006. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order :- O R D E R (a) The Appeal is allowed. (b) The order passed by the Court of 15th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kolhapur dated 26th December 2012, is set aside. Shiv 6/7 The complaint is restored to file. (c) The complainant is directed to appear before the 15th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kolhapur on 28th July 2023, at 11 am and is directed to take necessary steps. (d) Once the Respondent appears, the trial Court is directed to keep the matter on day-to-day basis. [S. M. MODAK, J.]

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 538 OF 2014 Amit Prakash Jaste ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondents ..... Rishi Bhuta a/w. Monish Bohra i/b. A.S.Khan & Associates, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.P.P.Shinde, A.P.P. for the Respondent/State. .... CORAM : M.L.TAHALIYANI J. DATED : 20TH AUGUST, 2014 P.C. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. S.O. to 03/09/2014. In the meantime, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b) JUDGE

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.538 of 2014 Amit Prakash Jaste .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr .. Respondents Mr.Rishi Bhuta and Mr.Manish Bohra i/b M/s.A.S.Khan & Associates for the applicant. Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP for the Respondent State. ­­­ CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : 14th NOVEMBER 2014. ­­­ P.C. : 1 Heard. 2 Rule. 3 Rule made returnable on 1st December 2014. 4 To be listed for final hearing at the end of the admission board along with other connected Writ Petitions which have, by an order dated 6th August 2014 already been directed to be listed for final hearing in the first week of December 2014. 5 In the mean time, the learned Magistrate shall not proceed further with the case. (ABHAY M.THIPSAY, J)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 538 OF 2014 Amit Prakash Jaste .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents Mr.Sunny Singh i/b A.S.Khan & Associates, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.M.G.Shukla, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP for the Respondent No.1 State. CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : 01st December, 2014. P.C. : 1 Mr.M.G.Shukla, the learned Counsel for respondent No.2 states that he has already received copy of the application. Mr.Sunny Singh, the learned Counsel for the applicant prays for time. 2 Granted finally. Stand over to 12/12/2014. 3 To be placed along with Writ Petition No. 834 of 2014 to Writ Petition No. 847 of 2014, Writ Petition No. 1494 of 2014 & Writ Petition No. 1495 of 2014, Writ Petition No. 1474 of 2014 to Writ Petition No. 1487 of 2014, Writ Petition No. 2562 of 2014 to Writ Petition No. 2568 of 2014 (ABHAY M.THIPSAY, J)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION rpa CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2201 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.378 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.379 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.380 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.381 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.382 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.383 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.384 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.385 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1739 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2202 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2203 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2204 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2205 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.373 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.376 OF 2014 Girishchandra Ugresan Sahoo Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.387 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.388 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.389 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.390 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.391 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.392 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.393 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.394 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.395 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.396 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.397 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1665 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1666 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1667 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1668 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1669 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1670 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2206 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2207 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2208 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2209 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2210 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2211 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2212 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2213 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2214 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2215 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1380 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.374 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.375 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.377 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1381 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1382 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1383 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1384 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1514 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1515 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1516 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1517 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1518 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1519 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1520 OF 2014 Shantanu Narayan Rooj & Anr. .. Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 538 OF 2014 Amit Prakash Jaste .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 834 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 836 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 837 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 838 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 839 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 840 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 841 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 842 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 843 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 844 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 845 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 846 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 847 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1474 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1475 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1476 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1477 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1478 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1479 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1480 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1481 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1482 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1483 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1484 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1485 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1486 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1487 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1494 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1495 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2562 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2563 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2564 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2565 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2566 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2567 OF 2014 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2568 OF 2014 Alok Sharma & Ors. Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. Respondents Mr.Prasad Kumar Das, Advocate for the Petitioners in W.P.No.2201 of 2014 & Group. …. Mrs. S.V. Gajare, A.P.P. for Respondent – State in W.P.No.2201 of 2014 & Group. Ms.Mrunmal Kulkarni, i/b. Mr.M.G. Shukla, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mr.A.P. Mundargi, Senior Advocate for the Petitioners in W.P.No.1380 of 2014 & Group. Mr.Y.S. Shinde, A.P.P. for Respondent – State in W.P.No.1380 of 2014 & Group. Ms.Mrunmal Kulkarni, i/b. Mr.M.G. Shukla, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mr.Rishi Bhuta i/b. A.S. Khan & Associates, Advocate for the Petitioners in APL No.538 of 2014 & Group. Mrs.M.R. Tidke, A.P.P. for Respondent – State in APL No.538 of 2014 & Group. Ms.Mrunmal Kulkarni, i/b. Mr.M.G. Shukla, Advocate for Respondent No.2. …. CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : DECEMBER 12, 2014. P.C. : The learned counsel for the respondent no.2 states that the respondent no.2 shall not proceed further in any of these matters in the Court of the Magistrate. 2 Stand over to 20th December, 2014. (ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.)

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No.538 of 2014 rpa Amit Prakash Jaste Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.834 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.835 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.836 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.837 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.838 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.839 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.840 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.841 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.842 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.843 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.844 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.845 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.846 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.847 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.1475 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1476 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.1477 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1478 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.1479 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1480 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.1481 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1482 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1483 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.1484 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1485 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.1486 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1487 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1494 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.1495 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.2562 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.2563 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2564 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2565 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.2566 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2567 of 2014 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No.2568 of 2014 Alok Sharma and others .. Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr .. Respondents Mr.Rishi Bhuta i/b. M/s. A.S. Khan & Associates, Advocate for the Aplicant. Mr.M.D. Pareek i/b. Mr.M. G. Shukla, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mrs.M.R. Tidke, APP for the Respondent State. --- CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : 20th DECEMBER, 2014. --- P.C. : On the prayer of learned counsel for the respondent no.2, stand over to 13th January, 2015, for final hearing. (ABHAY M.THIPSAY, J)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 252 OF 2013 Mr. Prakash Bapu Wani Appellant vs. Mr. Parashuram Ramchandra & Anr. Respondents Mr. Dundapa B. Patil,Advocate for the appellant. Ms. S.V.Gajare,APP,for the respondent-State CORAM: SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV,J. DATE : 18th June, 2013. P.C. Heard. Issue notice to respondent No.1. Learned APP waives service for respondent No.2. Notice returnable ten weeks. (SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.252 of 2013 Prakash Bapu Wani .. Applicant Versus Parashuram Ramchandra Rahate and anr .. Respondents Mr.D.B.Patil, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.D.S.Mhaispurkar, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mrs.S.V.Gajare, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM : ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : 2 nd MARCH, 2015 P.C. : 1 Heard. 2 Leave granted. 3 The Application for leave to Appeal be treated as a Memo of Appeal, and be numbered accordingly. The appeal is admitted. 4 Necessary amendment be carried out within two weeks. 5 The learned counsel for the respondent no.1 waives service of notice for final hearing. 6 The respondent no.1 shall, however, execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/ before the trial court within a period of six weeks from today.

Order - Status 5: SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2014 ...... Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ...Applicant Versus Lata Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant Applicant present in Court None for Respondent No.1 Ms. Usha Kejariwal, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State CORAM:- REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATED :- JANUARY 31, 2014 ...... P.C. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant. By this Application, the Applicant is challenging the order dated 5th December, 2013 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 52nd Court, Kurla, Mumbai, below Exhibit 4 in C. C. No. 189/Misc/2013, by which, her application came to be rejected, wherein she had challenged the locus standi of the Respondent No.1 to file an application under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The present Applicant is the daughter-in-law of the Respondent No.1. The Respondent No. 1 has filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking reliefs under Sections 18, 21 and 22 of the said Act, and has also sought protection order apart from other reliefs. The learned Counsel for the Applicant has relied on a Judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Varsha Kapoor vs. Union of India & Ors. in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 638 of 2010, in support of his contention that the term `respondent' as defined in Section 2(q), is restricted only to adult male persons while construing the expression, "a relative of the husband or the male partner." Issue notice to the respondent No.1, returnable on 11th February, 2014. Hamdust permitted. In addition to Court notice, Applicant to serve the respondent No.1 by Advocate's notice and file an affidavit of service before the returnable date. The learned Counsel for the Applicant, on the instructions of the Applicant, who is present in Court, states that she will not visit the house of respondent No.1 or create any nuisance or threaten the respondent No.1. Ad-interim stay in terms of prayer clause (c) till 12th February, 2014. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 7: SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2014 ...... ...... Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ...Applicant Versus Lata Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. ...Respondents Ms. Maya Upadeshe h/f Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant None for Respondent No.1 Ms. Usha Kejariwal, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State CORAM:- REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATED :- FEBRUARY 12, 2014 P.C. On 31st January, 2014, notice was issued, which was made returnable on 11th February, 2014 and hamdust was permitted. However, despite the said order, the Advocate for the applicant has not supplied spare copy and hence, notice could not be issued. It is made clear that if the spare copy is not supplied within two days from today, the stay granted vide order dated 31st January, 2014 shall stand vacated. Stand over to 14th February, 2014. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 9: Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani .Applicant V/s. Lata Srichand Sakhrani & anr. .Respondents None for the Applicant Mr.Tariq Khan, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 Mrs.U.V.Kejariwal, APP, for Respondent No.2 – State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 14TH FEBRUARY, 2014 P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for respondent No.1. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1 states that he will file his Vakalatnama within one week from today. Stand over to 28-02-2014. Till then, interim relief granted vide order dated 31-01-2014 to continue. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 11: nsc. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.66 OF 2014 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Office Notes, Memorandam of appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Office Court's or Judge's orders ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Mr.Laxman P. Kanal, for the applicant. Mr.Tariq Khan, for respondent no.1. Ms.U.V.Kejariwal, APP for the State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATED : 28th February, 2014. P.C. 1. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1, states that he will file his reply in the Registry during the course of the day. He states that a copy of the reply has been served on the Counsel for the Applicant. On the next date, an endeavour shall be made to decide the matter finally at the stage of 2/2 18-apl.66.2014.doc admission. Stand over to 7th March, 2014. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 13: SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2014 ...... ...... Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ...Applicant Versus Lata Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant Mr. Tariq Khan for Respondent No.1 Ms. Usha Kejariwal, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State CORAM:- REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATED :- MARCH 7, 2014 P.C. Heard Counsel for the parties. Arguable questions are raised. Admit. Mr. Khan waives service for respondent No.1. Ms. Kejariwal, A.P.P waives service for respondent No.2-State. To be listed in the 2nd week of April, 2014 at the end of the admision Board under caption `for final hearing and disposal'. There shall be an interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c). REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani .Applicant V/s. Lata Srichand Sakhrani & anr. .Respondents Mr.Laxman P. Kanal, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr.Tariq Khan, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP, for Respondent No.2 – State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 22ND APRIL, 2014 P.C. . By consent, stand over after vacation. Till then, interim relief granted earlier to continue. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 20: Osk 935-Apl-66-2014.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani … Applicant V/s. Laat Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. … Respondents Mr.Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant. Mr.S.S. Hulke, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2-State. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 17th June 2022. P.C. : . At the request of learned Advocate for Applicant, stand over to 28th June 2022. [A.S. GADKARI, J.] OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Digitally signed by OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Date: 2022.06.20 13:04:16 +0530

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APL NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani …..Applicant Vs. Lata Srichand Sakhrani & Anr. …..Respondents Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for the Applicant. Mr. R.M. Pethe APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 1st JULY, 2022. P.C.:- None for the Respondent No.1. In order to grant an opportunity to the Respondent No.1, stand over to 15th July, 2022. To be listed on supplementary board. (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ....APPLICANT V/S Laat Srichand Sakhrani And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr.Laxman Kalel for the Applicant. Mr. Tariq Khan for the Respondent No.-1. Mr. R.M.Pethe, APP for the Respondent - State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE A.S. GADKARI J DATE : 15th July, 2022 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Respondent , stand over to 22/07/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ....APPLICANT V/S Laat Srichand Sakhrani And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr. Laxman P. Kanal for Applicant Mrs. J. S. Lohokare APP-for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. G. SEWLIKAR J DATE : 22nd July, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 29/07/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN. U/S 482 NO. 66 OF 2014 Niharika Manoj Sakhrani ....APPLICANT V/S Laat Srichand Sakhrani And Anr ....RESPONDENT LAXMAN PRATABRAI KANAL A/W. DIVYA KANAL FOR APPLICANT YOGESH Y DABKE APP FOR STATE/RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 29th July, 2022 P.C. : The Registry to verify and place the matter before the appropriate Court. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2135 OF 2015 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders None present for petitioner. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for State. CORAM :SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV , J DATE :OCTOBER 8, 2015 P.C.: 1 None present. Learned APP submits that copy of this petition alongwith annexures has not been served upon the office of the prosecution. In the eventuality that it is served within one week from today, the learned APP shall waive service and seek instructions. Stand over to 19/11/2015. ( SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV , J) CERTIFICATE Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed Judgment/order.

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2135 OF 2015 Mr. Vikash Singh s/o. Prakash Singh…. Petitioner vs. The State of Maharashtra …. Respondents Mr. P.V.Dhopatkar i/b. Mr. Santosh S. Vhatkar,Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.A.A.Mane, APP, for the State. CORAM: SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV, J. DATE : 9 th August, 2016. P.C . Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties. The petitioner happens to be the original complainant in Crime No.285 of 2012 dated 20.7.2012, wherein he had initiated criminal proceedings against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused therein had filed an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. which was allowed by this Court vide order dated 3.8.2012. At the time of granting pre-arrest bail, this Court had directed the accused to be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the same amount. The accused was further directed to deposit a sum of Rs.52,00,000/- in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 26th court, Borivli within a period of four weeks. The learned Magistrate was directed to invest the said amount in the interest earning deposit schemes in the State Bank of India and was further directed to deal with the same at the end of the trial as per the result of the trial. Pursuant to the said order, the accused had deposited an amount of Rs.52,00,000/- in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate. The complainant herein had filed an application under Section 451 of Cr.P.C., being C.C. No.1631/PW/2013, contending that the petitioner was cheated for an amount of Rs.22,49,500/-. He had sought return of the said property i.e. the cash amount of Rs.22,49,500/-. The said application was rejected by the Metropolitan magistrate by an order dated 25.9.2014. The learned Magistrate had rightly observed that there are specific directions from the Hon'ble High Court that the said issue shall be dealt with in accordance with law at the end of the trial. The learned Magistrate has rightly considered that the said amount, which is being solicited to be returned, is neither an incriminating article which was seized in the course of investigation nor it is recovered at the instance of the accused. Upon a query made by this Court as to how the application under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. would be maintainable. The learned counsel for the petitioner makes a statement that since the property is in the custody of the Magistrate, the application would be maintainable under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. Section 451 of Cr.P.C. reads as follows :- "451. Order for custody and disposal of property pending trial in certain cases. When any property is produced before any Criminal Court during an inquiry or trial, the Court may make such order as it thinks fit for the proper custody of such property pending the conclusion of the inquiry or trial, and, if the property is subject to speedy and natural decay, or if it is otherwise expedient so to do, the Court may, after recording such evidence as it thinks necessary, order it to be sold or otherwise disposed of." The opening line of Section 451 is "when any property is produced before any Criminal Court". In the present case, the property was not recovered nor discovered nor seized at the best of the accused and not produced before the trial Court by the Investigating agency. The property was deposited in the custody of the Magistrate pursuant to an order passed by this Court while granting an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. and there was a specific order that the said amount be dealt with in accordance with law at the conclusion of the trial. In view of the above observations, the petition being sans merits, deserves to be dismissed. Petition stands dismissed. Rule is discharged. (SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.)