Mumbai Court August 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Santosh Tarachand Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
P.C. Heard. Learned APP has placed on record the certified copy of the rozanama. It would substantiate the allegations made by the counsel for the applicant on the last occasion. The charge-sheet was filed. In the present case, on 22/04/2013, applicant herein was charge-sheeted for offence punishable under section 354, 376, 511 of Indian Penal Code and section 7 and 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. The compilation of the charge-sheet would show that the witnesses have given consistent statement that on 17/03/2013 mother had picked up the child from the house of the applicant and had taken her home. When the child was taken home, she was fully dressed. At that juncture, she had not disclosed to her mother that she had been ravished by the present applicant. Compilation of the charge-sheet do not contain the statement of the victim. The statement of the victim was recorded on 11/06/2013. On 14/06/2013 the investigating officer had filed an application under ...
State Through P.i., Verna Police Station Vs. Kamlesh Kumar Bind
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
Oral Judgment : This appeal is directed against judgment of the learned JMFC, 'C' court, Vasco da Gama acquitting the respondent for offences punishable under Section 279, 337 and 304-A of the Penal Code, while the learned JMFC convicted the respondent for offence punishable under Section 134 (a) and (b) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. Facts which led to filing of this appeal are as under: On 3/12/2008, PW6/Shri Eurico Santana D'Silva was travelling in his official car along with his wife from Panaji to Margao. The car was being driven by PW3/Vasu Gawas. When the car had reached a place near Toyoto showroom on the road, tanker no.GA-01-T-7272 driven by the respondent came from the opposite side and dashed against this car no.GA-03-G-8008. The victim i.e. the wife of PW6/Eurico D'Silva, was trapped in the car. Police were informed and with the help of fire brigade, she was rescued. Wife of PW6/Shri Eurico D'Silva however, had suffered serious injuries and succumbed to those injuries. PW6/...
Suresh S/O Gangadhar Dharasurkar Vs. Secretary, Public Works Departmen ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
Oral Judgment: (A.H. Joshi, J.) 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent. 2] Petitioner has prayed for following reliefs in the present petition (A) To set aside the decision of the Respondent No.1 dated 28.11.2011 in deciding the representation dated 14/7/2011 (Exh.I) (B) To decide the representations dated 14/7/2012, 17/1/2012, 23/10/2012 and 27/10/2012 as early as possible and reduce the punishment from removal to reversion and grant all consequential reliefs such as pensioner benefits, annual increments by treating the Petitioner as if he was in service. (C) To draw an adverse inference against the Respondent No.1 as per provisions of section 115 of Evidence Act for failure of Government in providing copies of relied documents and documentary evidence in support of enhancement of punishment from reversion to removal etc. (D) To order the Respondent No.1 to sanction Rs. 5 Lakhs as per application dt. 29/1/12 (Exh. D) dt. 29/11/12 as early as possible as ...
Dattatraya Ramchandra Jadhav Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
S.B. Shukre, J. 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 15th October, 2012 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Satara, externing the petitioner from the limits of Satara District for a period of 2 years and also the order passed by the appellate authority dated 22nd March, 2013 confirming the externment order. 2. This petition has been heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the parties. Hence, Rule made returnable forthwith. Learned A.P.P. waives service of notice for the respondents. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not been served with any show cause notice and has been denied an opportunity to defend himself in the externment proceedings initiated against him. He further argued that mother of the petitioner had informed the inquiry officer, Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Satara about his inability to attend the proce...
Dilip Babasaheb Londhe and Others Vs. State Through P.P. and Another
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
These two petitions questioning continuance of two separate criminal cases against the petitioners' newspapers are being disposed of by this common judgment because of the common question of law involved, though facts giving rise to these petitions are different. 2. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.10/2011 are the Executive Editor and publishers of Marathi newspaper Pudhari. Before 22/11/2009, a meeting was held in Menezes Braganza Institution at Panaji. Advocate Govind Pansare the accused no.4 and Dr. Narendra Dabholkar- the accused no.5 in the complaint, addressed the said meeting. The petitioners' newspaper published this news on 22/11/2009. The news item refers to Sanatan Sanstha and reports that Advocate Govind Pansare stated that the institutions like Sanatan Sanstha were harming religion. Similar were the observations of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar reported in the petitioners' newspaper. 3. After this news item was published, on behalf of Sanatan Sanstha, Shri Virendra Pandurang ...
Bholaram, Since Deceased L.Rs. and Others Vs. Nanded Sachkhand Huzursa ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
1. These two second appeals have been preferred by original plaintiff-Bholaram and defendant no.4 State of Maharashtra arising out of Regular Civil Suit No.297/1974 and against judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court dated 29.03.1984 in Regular Civil Appeal No.19/1980 passed by District Judge who allowed the said appeal and dismissed the suit filed by original plaintiff-Bholaram. FACTS 2. Nanded Sachkhand Huzursaheb Achpalnagar Gurudwara Board (The Board for the sake of brevity) had filed Reg. C.S. No.155/1965 on 30.11.1965 against one Shankarlal-respondent no.2 herein and Dhanaji for their eviction and possession of two plots admeasuring 150 ft. X 50 ft. and 100 ft. X 40 ft. of land survey no.7, which were leased out to them under the lease deeds Exh.68 and 85 respectively. The Civil Court passed the decree of possession in favour of Board which stood confirmed in Second Appeal in the year 1974. Shankarlal and Chandulal were brothers and sons of Bholaram Girdharilal. Shankarl...
Shahajahan Aliakbar Khan Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
Oral Judgment: (Mrs. Bhatkar, J.) 1. The appellant is sentenced to suffer R.I. for life imprisonment for the offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code and also to suffer R.I. for 2 years for the offence punishable u/s 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The incident of assault has taken place near Buckley building on Wodehouse Road, Colaba, Mumbai at about 10.45 pm on 6.12.2006. A group of five friends i.e., Sunil Shendge i.e., the Complainant (PW1), Anod Kahar (injured), Harish Savare (deceased), Ganesh Haldar (PW6), Sabir Ansari (PW7) went to one Gokul Restaurant near Regal Cinema at around 8pm on that day. They drank beer and had food and started proceeding towards their house. At that time, a group of waiters working in Taj Valentan Mwef restaurant situate near Electric house, Colaba including Satish Gupta (PW2) Kamlesh Pathak (PW3), Mangesh Dhuri (PW4), Gopal Girkar (PW5) and one Rakesh Valmiki after their duty, were going towards V.T. Station from Wodehouse road. At that t...
Akram Ajij Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
AbhayM. Thipsay, J. Rule. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith. The learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent, heard finally forthwith. 2 By this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the externment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-II, Pune City, under the provisions of Section 56(1)(a) and 56 (1)(b) of The Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 (Act No. XXII of 1951) [Previous short title changed by the Maharashtra (Change of Short Titles of Certain Bombay Acts) Act 2011, (Mah. Act No. 24 of 2012], (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and confirmed in appeal by the Secretary (Spl.), Home Department, Government of Maharashtra. 3 The petitioner is a resident of 425/26, Audogik Vasahat Zopadpatti, Pune. The petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 21/1/2013 under Section 59(1) of the said Act, informing him that it had been proposed to extern him from Pune City, Pune District and the adjoining five districts, ...
Raghunath R. P. Sawkar and Another Vs. Shailendra R. P. Dessai
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
Oral Judgment: Heard Mr. R. G. Ramani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. The above petition challenges the judgment dated 16.05.2011 passed by the learned Administrative Tribunal in Tenancy Revision Application No.66/2004 and Misc. Appln. No.257/2004 whereby the revision preferred by the respondent was allowed and the judgment passed by the learned Mamlatdar dismissing the application filed by the respondent to declare him as tenant of the disputed property came to be set aside. The dispute hanging fire between the petitioners and the respondent for last four decades. It is the claim of the petitioners that the respondent is a caretaker of the disputed property which is surveyed under nos.428/3, 428/4, 408/1 and 420/1 of Village Shiroda in Ponda Taluka. The claim of the respondent is that he is the tenant of the disputed property. It is not in dispute that the disputed property is an areca nut garden...
Madhukar S/O Kisan Lokhande Vs. Smt. Shalu Wd/O Narendra Lokhande
Court: Mumbai Nagpur
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
Oral Judgment: (A.S. Chandurkar, J.) 1. Heard Shri Samudra for the appellant and Shri Meghe for the respondent. 2. Admit. Since the notice was issued for final disposal of the appeal, with consent of parties, same is being finally decided. 3. The appellant in the present appeal that has been filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act challenges the Judgment dated 11-4-2012, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No.2, Nagpur whereby the appellant has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- per month to the respondent towards her maintenance. FACTS 4. The respondent and one Narendra Lokhande were married on 27-5-1996. Out of the said wed lock, a son named Kartik was born. Narendra expired on 7-9-2009. According to the respondent, she was unable to maintain herself and her son after the death of her husband Narendra. The present appellant who is the father-in-law of the respondent did not seek to maintain them. According to the respondent, an agriculture field, in which her decea...