Mumbai Court December 2014 Judgments
Pravinbhai Gambhichand Shah and Others Vs. Nenshi V. Khirani and Other ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-29-2014
P.C. :1. The urgency as urged on behalf of the applicants is on account of non-bailable warrants issued to the petitioners by the impugned order.2. The challenge in this application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to an order dated 27.11.2014 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 61st Court, Kurla, Mumbai. By the impugned order the learned Trial Judge has issued non-bailable warrants against accused nos.2 to 21 and 23 to 28 in the proceedings of Private Complaint Case No.243/SS/2005, to secure their presence before the Court on 5.1.2015. The reason for issuance of non-bailable warrant being that the Junior Advocate attached to the chamber of Shri.H.K.Prem does not have vakalatnama to represent the applicants.3. Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that initially vakalatnama in the private complaint case was filed on behalf of the applicants-accused by Advocate Shri.H.K.Prem. It is submitted that the junior of Advocate Shri.H.K.Prem, Adv...
Tag this Judgment!The Maharashtra Public Commission Through its Secretary Vs. Dr. Digamb ...
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
S.V. Gangapurwala, J.1) The petitioner Commission published advertisement inviting application from the interested candidate for filing up the post of Education Officer. Pursuant to the said advertisement respondent No. 1 submitted his application. As per clause 4 of the advertisement, it is stated that the age of the candidate for reservation category should not be more than 45 years. The respondent No. 1 on the date of submitting application was 47 years 6 months and 14 days. After screening test, inquiry was conducted. The candidature of respondent No. 1 is rejected on the ground that he is over age.2) The respondent No. 1 aggrieved by the rejection of his candidature on the ground of age, filed Original Application bearing No. 775/2011 before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Aurangabad. The tribunal allowed the Original Application and directed the present petitioner to allow the respondent No. 1 to participate in the selection process and to give benefit of age relaxation ...
Tag this Judgment!Collin Curry and Others Vs. Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, Thr ...
Court: Mumbai Goa
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
F.M. Reis, J.1. Heard Shri Supekar, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Mr. Salkar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondent nos. 1, 4 and 7, Mr. Naik, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent nos. 2 and 3 and Shri Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no. 5.2. The above Petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India essentially seeks for a writ of mandamus or a writ in a nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent nos. 1 to 4 and 6 to inter alia take action against the Respondent no. 5 to demolish/remove the structures put up on Vainguinim beach in the form of a Jetty, Shed for the Water Sports Activities, etc., to remove the constructions and the development carried out by the Respondent no. 4 in the Public Nallah between the properties surveyed under nos. 803 and 804; to order the removal and demolition of the structures referred to in the sketch marked as annexure 'F' in survey no. 246/2; to forthwith stop the...
Tag this Judgment!Raju Laxman Pachhapure Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
P.C. 1. By these applications the applicants, apprehending arrest in connection with Crime Nos.137 and 2 of 2014, registered on 15th and 16th September, 2014 respectively with Shivaji Nagar and Shahapur Police Stations, Ichalkaranji, District Kolhapur for offences under Sections 328 and 188 r/w Section 34 of the IPC and Section 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 have prayed for pre-arrest bail. The ABA-Nos.1277 and 1279 of 2014 are preferred by accused No.1, while ABA-Nos.1278 and 1280 of 2014 are preferred by accused No.2 in said crimes. 2. Both said crimes are registered upon the FIRs lodged by one Abhinandan Mahavir Randive, who was working as a Food and Security Officer at Food and Drug Government Office at Kolhapur. 3. The first information leading to registration of Crime No.137 of 2014 reveals that on 15-9-2014, at about 17:25 hours, the first informant had received an information on phone from Shivaji Nagar Police Station that a tempo of accused No.1 Raju was seized ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhanudas Ranoba Tele and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
Oral Judgment: (G.S. Kulkarni, J.) 1. The Appellants/original accused no 1 to 6, who stand convicted for the offence punishable under Section 147, 148, 149, 201, 324, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/-each, and independent sentences to suffer R.I. for one year for the offence punishable under Section 147, 148 of the Indian Penal Code, R.I for three years for the office punishable under section 324 read with Section 149 and R.I. for three years and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default R.I. for six months under section 201 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, with a direction that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently, by the Ist Ad hoc Sessions Judge, Pandharpur, by judgment dated 8.5.2007 in Sessions Case no.102 of 2006, by this appeal challenges their conviction and sentence. 2. Facts as are necessary for decision of this appeal may briefly be stated thus:- P.W.26Gonvind Bhagwan Omase, Police Sub-Insp...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Maharashtra Vs. Soma Laxman Nikam
Court: Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
S.S. Shinde, J. 1. This Appeal is filed by the State, challenging the Judgment and Order of acquittal dated 25.09.1995 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Sessions Case No. 124 of 1992, thereby acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: The case of the prosecution is that the deceased [a deserted married woman] was residing with her parents at Fekari. The parents of deceased agreed to purchase a house and earnest amount Rs.2,000/- was paid. But sale deed was not executed. Accused are related to both purchaser and seller. A serious dispute arose in between deceased and her family members and accused. Due to this, accused on 14.08.1991 around 2.30 set the deceased on fire resulting in her death. She was taken to Hospital by her grandmother and other relatives. She died on 15.08.1991. Two dying declarations were recorded; one by Police Head Constable and other by E...
Tag this Judgment!Kolte Patil Developers Limited Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
Naresh Patil, J. 1. The petitioner sought for direction for declaration that the land described in Exh.B to the petition stands released from the reservation for a primary school under the Development Plan 1987 for Pune city by virtue of section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 ("MRTP Act" for short). The petitioner further prayed for direction to the respondents to complete the acquisition proceedings and to declare award by taking possession of the subject land under section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 2. The petitioner contended that on 5th January 1987 a final development plan was published. The petitioner has development rights of plot No.188 of Sangamwadi in Pune. The said plot was shown reserved for primary school in the said final development plan. On 10th February 1988, respondent No.2-Corporation moved an application requiring the Government of Maharashtra to acquire the land for the purposes of the primary school as per the reservation ma...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Digambar Kshirsagar and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
P.C. 1. For the detail reasons recorded in the order dated 01-12-2014 the ad-interim direction in terms of section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure was passed in favour of the applicants who are respectively father in law and mother in law of victim Priyanka in connection with C.R. No.311 of 2014 registered with Yawat police station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 306, 420, 498-A read with 34 of Indian Penal Code registered on the count of Priyanka having met with unnatural death at her matrimonial house i.e. death due to hanging. 2. In pursuant to the notice of application served, the prosecution has filed detailed reply. Learned APP has objected the prayer for confirming the said direction on the count of tangible material having been collected during the course of investigation prima facie showing involvement of the applicants for commission of the offence for which the crime is registered. 3. The applicants on their turn has filed an affidavit for establish...
Tag this Judgment!Ambadas Kisan Bhagwat and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
P.C. 1. For the detail reasons recorded in the order dated 19-12-2014 the ad-interim direction in terms of section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure was granted in favour of applicants in connection with C.R. No.313 of 2014 registered with Daund police station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. The learned APP opted to argue the matter without filing say on the basis of papers of investigation. 2. The perusal of the F.I.R. reveals that the incident of assault had emerged out of quarrel which was in progress in between applicant No.1 and his nephew. It also reveals that accused Ambadas was not armed with weapon since beginning at the time of the incident. It reveals that after the said nephew questioning Ambadas for giving abuse to his mother, the applicants enraged, returned to their house and brought weapons. Even account of incident mentioned in F.I.R. reveals that both the blows given by the applicant No.2 were n...
Tag this Judgment!M/s. Flemingo (Duty Free Shop) Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. The Commissio ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-24-2014
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally. 2. This Writ Petition (WP/1830/2013) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals)/Respondent No.1 dated 27th December, 2012. In other words, the essential prayer in this Writ Petition is to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof calling records pertaining to the impugned order and after due scrutiny thereof, the same be quashed and set aside. 3. It is the case of the Petitioner that it is a private limited company registered and incorporated under Indian Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged inter alia in the business of operation of duty free shops at airports and seaports in India. The Petitioner is running duty free shops pursuant to contracts and it is their case that presently 35 duty free shops at various airports and se...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »