Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

20841 judgments · newest first · showing 4001–4200

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORSversusGANPATI VITHAL JADHAV AND ANR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the awards of a Reference Court that had enhanced compensation for land acquired for the Malhipparga Percolation Tank No.9. The claimants cross‑objected, seeking further compensation based on sale instances from the same village and on a prior judgment (First Appeal …

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORSversusGANPATI VITHAL JADHAV AND ANR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra acquired land in Malhipparga village for a percolation tank, taking possession in 2002 and issuing a Section 4 notification in 2004. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs 889‑Rs 978 per R, which the Reference Court later enhanced to Rs 3,100 for dry land …

PARDES DAGDU BHOSLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Pardes Dagdu Bhosle, was arrested for alleged penetrative sexual assault and related offences against his daughter, as alleged in Crime No. 0275 of 2026. The victim testified that she filed the FIR under pressure from her mother, claiming the father had been abusive towards the …

KULDEEP PRABHAKARRAO GHANversusRAMKISHAN GANPAT THAKUR AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Kuldeep Prabhakarrão Ghan, filed a criminal application seeking condonation of a 108‑day delay in filing a leave‑to‑appeal petition. The respondent, Ramkishan Ganpat T1hakur, and the State opposed the condonation, arguing that the delay was unjustified. The learned counsel for the …

THE STATE OF MAHversusKIRAN GOVIND PAWAR AND ANR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the awards of a Reference Court that had enhanced compensation for land acquired for the Malhipparga Percolation Tank No.9. The claimants cross‑objected, seeking further compensation and relied on sale instances from the same village, including a prior decision …

THE STATE OF MAHversusKIRAN GOVIND PAWAR AND ANR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the award of a Reference Court that had enhanced compensation for land acquired for the Malhipparga Percolation Tank No.9. The claimants cross‑objected, seeking further compensation based on sale instances from the same village and a prior judgment (First Appeal …

THE STATE OF MAHversusUTTAM GOVINDRAO MORE

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the awards of a Reference Court that had enhanced compensation for land acquired for the Malhipparga Percolation Tank No.9. The claimants cross‑objected, seeking further compensation based on sale instances from the same village and on a prior judgment (First Appeal …

MAHTER BHANGI SAMAJ DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION JINTUR THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT SHAIKH G S SHAFEEversusTHE MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Janjhit Seva Sanstha and Mehter Bhangi Samaj Development Foundation, challenged orders of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation that cancelled their agreements and directed them to surrender possession of washrooms to the Divisional Controller. The High Court examined the …

THE STATE OF MAHversusSANGRAM DIGAMBAR JADHAV

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra acquired land in Malhipparga village for a percolation tank, awarding compensation at Rs.889‑Rs.978 per R. The Reference Court enhanced this to Rs.3,100‑Rs.4,650 per R based on sale instances, which the State appealed. Claimants filed cross‑objections seeking further …

INDUBAI EKNATH PATILversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA and OTHRS.

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a criminal writ petition challenging an order communicated on 28 September 2020 and subsequent notices. The respondents' counsel submitted the communications for the court's record. The petitioner's counsel reviewed the documents and agreed that the petition could be disposed …

THE STATE OF MAHversusSANGRAM DIGAMBAR JADHAV

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra acquired land in Malhipparga village for a percolation tank, issuing a Section 4 notification in 2004 and awarding compensation in 2007 at Rs 889‑Rs 978 per R. The Claimants challenged the award, and the Reference Court enhanced compensation to Rs 3,100 per R for dry land …

THE STATE OF MAHversusNAGORAO MAROTI PAWAR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra acquired land in Malhipparga village for a percolation tank and awarded compensation at Rs.889‑Rs.978 per R. The Reference Court enhanced the award to Rs.3,100‑Rs.4,650 per R, prompting the State to appeal and the claimants to file cross‑objections seeking further …

THE STATE OF MAHversusGOVIND PANDHARI KENDRE

DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed against awards enhancing compensation for land acquired for the Malhipparga Percolation Tank No.9, arguing that the reference court had erred by not considering sale instances used by the Land Acquisition Officer. The claimants cross‑objected, seeking further …

THE STATE OF MAHversusGOVIND PANDHARI KENDRE

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed against awards of compensation granted by a Reference Court for land acquired in 2002‑2004 for the Malhipparga Percolation Tank No. 9. The Reference Court had enhanced compensation based on certain sale instances, but the State argued the enhancement was excessive …

THE STATE OF MAHversusDIGAMBAR VITHAL WADJE

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the Reference Court’s enhancement of compensation for land acquired for the Malhipparga Percolation Tank No.9 in Latur district. The original award by the Land Acquisition Officer gave Rs 889‑Rs 978 per R, which the Reference Court raised to Rs 3,100‑Rs 4,650 per R …

THE STATE OF MAHversusDIGAMBAR VITHAL WADJE

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra acquired land in Malhipparga village for a percolation tank and awarded compensation at Rs.889‑Rs.978 per R. The Reference Court enhanced the award to Rs.3,100‑Rs.4,650 per R, prompting the State to appeal and the claimants to file cross‑objections seeking further …

THE STATE OF MAHversusDIGAMBER MAROTI KENDRE

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra acquired land in Malhipparga village for a percolation tank, awarding compensation at Rs.889‑Rs.978 per R. The Reference Court enhanced this to Rs.3,100‑Rs.4,650 per R based on certain sale instances. The State appealed the enhancement, while claimants filed cross‑objections …

THE STATE OF MAHversusDIGAMBER MAROTI KENDRE

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra acquired land in Malhipparga village for a percolation tank and awarded compensation at Rs.889‑Rs.978 per R. The Reference Court enhanced the award to Rs.3,100‑Rs.4,650 per R, prompting the State to appeal and the claimants to file cross‑objections seeking further …

BUNTY GULAB RAHASEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISMISSED

The applicant, Bunty Gulab Rahase, sought bail in a murder case under Sections 103(1), 115(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging that the prosecution’s case rests solely on circumstantial evidence and lacks any direct link to him. He argued that co‑accused Mahada Thakare and …

WASAN AUTOMOBILES THROUGH ITS MANAGERversusASHOK LAXMAN DEVADE

Transfer to other court

Wasan Automobiles appealed against a trial court's acquittal on a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The appellant sought transfer of the appeal to the District and Sessions Court, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran. The High Court, …

RAJENDRA SHANKARLAL KABARAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Rajendra Shankarlal Kabara, was acquitted in a Special ACB case under the Prevention of Corruption Act after seizure of gold, silver ornaments and other articles. The State appealed the acquittal, but the appeal was dismissed. The petitioner then filed a criminal writ petition …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHRAversusRAOSAHEB BHIMRAO NEHARKAR

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The Anti‑Corruption Bureau (ACB) of Beed investigated a complaint that Police Head Constable Raosaheb Neharkar demanded a Rs 1,000 bribe to prevent chapter proceedings against the complainant's father. A trap was set using a pancha and a voice recorder, which allegedly captured the demand and …

LATA D/O. MACHINDRA LANDGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISMISSED

The applicant, who was the informant in Crime No. 197 of 2012, was dissatisfied with the acquittal of the accused by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad on 9 April 2019. He filed Criminal Appeal No. 123 of 2019, which was dismissed on 6 April 2022. Subsequently, he filed a criminal …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANRversusVIJAYKUMAR SHANKARRAO INGALE AND ANR

DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra acquired land for rehabilitation of earthquake‑affected persons under a notification dated 08‑09‑1995 and paid compensation of Rs.340 per R as per the award of 11‑06‑1996. The claimants, dissatisfied with this amount, filed a reference case under Section 18 of the Land …

XYZversusQUAZI AFFAN AHMED AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants, Quazi Affan Ahmed and another, were implicated in Crime No. 0685 of 2025 under several offences of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, based on a FIR filed by Muskan Salim Pathan who claimed to be an advocate and alleged assault, theft and outrage of modesty. The applicants contended …

BHANUDASRAO MADHAVRAO DESHMUKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

A contempt petition (No. 280 of 2011) was filed by Bhanudasrao Madhavrao Deshmukh against the State of Maharashtra and others. During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel informed the court that the petitioner had died. The court held that, in the absence of a surviving petitioner or a legal …

MAHADU SAKRUJI RAUTversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Mahadu Sakruji Raut, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel informed the court that the petition could be disposed of as infructuous due to subsequent developments. The court accepted this submission. …

PRAVIN PRAKASH DONGAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, a child specialist employed on a contractual basis, filed a writ petition seeking the regularisation of his services with the municipal corporation. The petitioner relied on a prior decision of the same court in Arti Nlesh Dapse & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No. 3053 …

SUDHAKAR MANGO PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Sudhakar Mango Patil, filed a criminal writ petition seeking to set aside a police notice dated 08-06-2022 issued by Pahur Police Station, Jalgaon. No steps were taken by the petitioner to advance the matter before the Court since May 2022, and the petitioner was absent at the …

TATYARAO KASHINATH BANSODEversusKAILASH KISAN BANSODE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Tatyarao Kashinath Bansode, filed a writ petition challenging the trial court’s order rejecting his application for appointment of a Court Commissioner in a civil suit for possession of 13 R of land. The trial court had held that the onus of proving ownership lay on the plaintiff and …

ASHOK VITHOBA KAMBLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, heirs of persons whose lands were acquired for earthquake‑rehabilitation in Salegaon, challenged the reference court’s award of Rs 4 per square foot compensation, arguing that they should receive Rs 20 per square foot on the ground of parity with other acquisitions for the same …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusSURESH SHIVRAJ SHETKAR AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra, represented by the Anti‑Corruption Bureau, sought leave to appeal an acquittal of a police inspector (accused No.1) and a driving‑school owner (accused No.2) for alleged bribery under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The prosecution claimed that accused No.2 demanded Rs …

SAKHARAM S/O. MOTIRAM WAWHALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant, a lineman, was convicted by a Sessions Judge under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly demanding and accepting a Rs.500 bribe to install an electric meter. The prosecution’s case relied on the complainant’s testimony and panch …

DILIP BHIKANRAO SOLUNKEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant, a Talathi, was convicted under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding a bribe of Rs.1,500 to facilitate land mutation. The prosecution’s case relied on the complainant’s and a shadow pancha’s testimonies alleging a demand, while the defence argued that the payment …

DHONDIRAM RAMCHANDRA MOREversusGHANGADHAR RAMCHANDRA MORE and ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant, Dhondiram Ramchandra More, filed a second appeal before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The appellant's counsel submitted written instructions authorising the withdrawal of the appeal. The court recorded the instructions as exhibit X‑1. The appellant then sought leave of the …

SANTOSH @ BANDU PANDHARINATH NAWALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, Santosh @ Bandu Pandharinath Nawalé and Amol Ambadas Bhosale, filed anticipatory bail applications fearing arrest in connection with Crime No.130/2025 involving alleged supply of contraband gutkha. The FIR records a raid that seized a large quantity of gutkha from a co‑accused, whose …

SHAHADEO KISAN WAGHMAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHERS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants' lands were acquired in 1997 for a percolation tank under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the award was made in 1999. The appellants contended that the Reference Court had not used the highest comparable sale exemplar, specifically Exh.21, and had failed to adjust for size and …

VISHNU PRABHU KADAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHERS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for their lands acquired for a percolation tank in Beed district, arguing that the Reference Court failed to apply the highest comparable sale exemplar. The lands included irrigated and non‑irrigated parcels, as well as potkharaba (barren) land. The …

AMOL AMBADAS BHOSALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, Santosh @ Bandu Pandharinath Nawalé and Amol Ambadas Bhosale, filed anticipatory bail applications fearing arrest in connection with Crime No.130/2025 involving alleged supply of contraband gutkha. The FIR records a raid that seized a large quantity of gutkha from a co‑accused, whose …

Madhuri Suhas PanmandversusSuhas Dashrath Panmand

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Madhuri Suhas Panmand, filed a miscellaneous civil application seeking the transfer of her marriage petition (No. 843/2025) from the 16th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division in Pune to the Civil Judge Senior Division in Ahmednagar. The respondent, Suhas Dashrath Panmad, through his …

SHAMRAO NANHU PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISMISSED

Shamrao Nanhu Pawar filed a criminal writ petition seeking a court direction for the police to investigate the suspected death of his son and to register a crime against respondents 4 and 5. The Court examined the petition and noted that the petitioner had taken no steps in the matter since June …

RUPALI PRALHAD SAPKALversusPRALHAD DASHRATH SAPKAL AND OTHERS

DISMISSED

The wife (applicant) obtained an ex‑parte maintenance order under Sections 18‑22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, after the husband and others failed to appear before the Judicial Magistrate. The respondents appealed, and the Additional Sessions Judge set aside the …

YASHODABAI MANOHAR KALWANE AND OTHERSversusSHANKAR DADA BHALKAR AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a civil application seeking restoration of Writ Petition No.12774 of 2021, which had been dismissed on 27.04.2026 for want of prosecution because their counsel failed to appear at two scheduled hearings. The petitioners explained that the advocate was detained in another matter …

ANISA KHANAM WIFE OF RAFIQUE AHMADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Anisa Khanam filed a private complaint for offences under the IPC, and the Judicial Magistrate First Class acquitted the accused. She appealed the acquittal under Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the Sessions Court, which dismissed the appeal on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, …

MADHAVI BABU KAMBLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, heirs of persons whose lands were acquired for earthquake rehabilitation in Salegaon, challenged the compensation awarded by the Reference Court at Rs.4 per square foot, seeking the higher rate of Rs.20 per square foot on the ground of parity with other similar acquisitions. The …

MATHURA RAJU PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Mathura Raju Pawar, was elected as a member and subsequently as Sarpanch of the Dughala Village Panchayat in the 2021 elections. She later faced a no‑confidence motion which was decided against her at both the Gram Panchayat and the higher authority. She filed a writ petition (902 WR …

NARSING MAHADEO DEOREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, whose lands were acquired for the rehabilitation of earthquake‑affected persons in Salegaon, sought to increase the compensation awarded by the Reference Court from Rs 4 per square foot to Rs 20 per square foot, invoking the principle of parity with other similar acquisitions (LAR …

SURESH GANGARAM PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a contempt petition (No. 234 of 2013) against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petition remained pending for over a decade, and the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the passage of time had rendered the petition infructuous. The Court examined whether a …

DR PRAKASH KAHNAYALAL KANKRIYAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Dr. Prakash Kahnayalal Kankriya, the owner of Gut No.190/2 in Nimbalak village, challenged an award dated 30‑04‑2010 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 that incorrectly recorded the vendor’s name and the area as 63 R instead of the correct 23 R. After a prior writ petition in 2022 was partially …

BHAGWAN KERBA MORE DIED THR LRS SOPAN AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The petitioners filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 3,994‑day delay in filing a separate civil application to bring the legal representatives of the deceased appellant, Shivaji, on record, and also requested that the abatement of the earlier proceeding be set aside. The State opposed …

BHIMRAO YADAV BHALERAO SONAWANE AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISMISSED

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for 30 R of land acquired in 1975 for the extension of a Gaothan in Mamurabad, arguing that the land had non‑agricultural and residential potential and that the award should be enhanced beyond the Reference Court's increase to Rs 21,666 per hectare. …

AJAY SHARADCHANDRA PATHAKversusCHANDRAKANT TRIMBAK DESHMUKH

Transfer to other court

The appellant, Ajay Sharadchandra Pathak, appealed against a trial court's acquittal on a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He sought transfer of the appeal to the District and Sessions Court, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran …

STATE OF MAHA and ORSversusBASWARAJ VIRAPPA KARBHARI

DISMISSED

The claimants' lands in Murum village were acquired under a notification issued pursuant to Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded compensation of Rs.14,000 and Rs.12,000 per hectare. The learned Land Reference Court later increased the award …

SHYAM SHANKAR JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, convicted under IPC sections 376(2)(f) (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation), filed an application seeking suspension of his sentence and bail pending appeal. He contended that the trial court relied solely on the victim's testimony without medical corroboration, argued the …

BABASAHEB KASHINATH PARDHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Babasaheb Kashinath Pardhi, filed a writ petition seeking a pension under the old pension scheme. The Court noted that the issue had already been decided by a Full Bench in a prior case. It was admitted that the post in question did not receive a grant until 2005, making the …

ANAND VIJAYKUMAR KUKDEJAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Anand Vijaykumar Kukdeja applied for anticipatory bail in connection with a case alleging that gold pledged for a loan was spurious, violating Sections 318(4), 316(2) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The FIR states he obtained a loan of Rs.8.65 lakh, but the gold verification was conducted …

SHAIKH NARGIS JAVEDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISMISSED

Shaikh Nargis Javed, a homeopathic medical practitioner, applied for anticipatory bail after the police registered a case (CR No. 203/2026) alleging she administered pills that terminated the pregnancy of a minor girl, violating Sections 64 and 91 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, …

BHIMRAO DHONDIBA HONRAO PATILversusMADHAVI BHIMRAO HONRAO PATIL AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The petitioner filed a criminal application seeking condonation of a 99‑day delay in filing a criminal revision. The court examined the reasons for the delay and found them satisfactory. Accordingly, the delay was condoned and the criminal application was disposed. The court then directed that the …

THE STATE OF MAHversusDATTATRAYA KONDIRAM SABALE

DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of Dattatraya Kondiram Sabale in a case arising from a mob disturbance at a hospital after a patient died, alleging offences under Sections 143, 147, 149, 323, 427, 451 and 504 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on the testimony of a complainant (PW1), …

BHAGWANT BAJRANGRAO KADAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Bhagwant Bajrangrao Kadam, filed a review application in the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and others. The applicant's counsel, G.R. Jagtap, subsequently requested leave to withdraw the review application. The sole issue before …

NITIN LIMBAJI KANDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Nitin Limbaji Kande, was arrested on 4 March 2026 for alleged offences under Sections 8(c) and 20 of the NDPS Act after a large quantity of ganja was seized from a room he occupied, which he claimed was owned by a neighbour. He argued that the seizure was improper because the …

POOJA AKSHAY PAWARversusAKSHAY VINAYAK PAWAR

DISPOSED OFF

Pooja Akshay Pawar filed Writ Petition No. 6102 of 2026 before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against her husband Akshay Vinayak Pawar. The petitioner, through counsel Mr. Prasad S. Dikle, later applied for permission to withdraw the petition. The Court examined whether …

EXECUTIVE ENGINEERE (M S E B )versusPRAKASH NAGIN PATIL and ORS.

DISMISSED

The Executive Engineer (M.S.E.B.) appealed a 2005 judgment and award of compensation in a land acquisition case, contending that the reference court had enhanced the compensation beyond the four‑times limit set by the State Government's policy resolution. The State argued that the enhancement was …

MITHUN SHALINDAR JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad bench, heard three bail applications filed by Mandar Mukund Karambelk​ar in criminal matters. After hearing counsel for the applicants and the State, the court noted that the applicants in Bail Applications No.1104/2026 and No.1160/2026 chose to withdraw their …

DATTATRAYA BAPPAJI KULKARNI THR LRSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act for the Lower Dudhana Project, arguing that the reference court had undervalued the land by relying on inappropriate sale comparables. The State contended that the reference court correctly used …

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. BEEDversusVIMAL TUKARAM BAGATE AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The Oriental Insurance Company filed a first appeal (No. 2864 of 2009) against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Aurangabad, in favour of Vimal Tukaram Bagate and others. The insurer later submitted an email and a letter authorising the withdrawal of the appeal, having already …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERSversusPUNDALIK DHONDIBA SHINDE

DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the common Judgment and Award of the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Udgir, which had enhanced compensation for lands acquired for a Ring Road project based on sale deeds presented by the claimants. The State argued that the Reference Court erred by …

GOVIND HIRALAL GADHEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant Govind Gadhe was arrested in connection with a land‑dispute incident where he and others allegedly assaulted the complainant and his son with a wooden stick, while another accused used a sickle. The prosecution alleged offences under Sections 307, 326, 504, 506 read with 34 of the IPC …

PANDITRAO WAMANRAO PAWAR AND OTHERSversusSAYABAI NAMDEO AGLAVE AND ORS.

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants, Panditrao Wamanrao Pawar and others, filed civil applications seeking to raise objections before the Revenue Authority against a precept issued to the District Collector under Section 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was issued to enforce a decree from the Civil Court. The …

TEJAS UMESH MOREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Tejas Umesh More, who is charged under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for offences including attempt to murder and criminal intimidation. The applicant had previously been released on bail, failed to …

ASHOKKUMARR AKSHYABATNATH MISHTRAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

ABATED

The appellant, Ashokkumarr Akshyabatnath Mishtra, filed a criminal appeal but did not appear before the court. A bailable warrant was issued, and a report indicated that the appellant had died, though his son failed to produce a death certificate. The court considered whether the appeal could …

BHAGUBAI ARJUN BHOSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Bhagubai Arjun Bhos filed Contempt Petition No. 305 of 2020 arising from WP/1878/2018 against the State of Maharashtra. The petition alleged that the State had failed to comply with a prior order, constituting contempt. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order under contempt …

HANUMANT KISAN MALIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Hanumant Kisan Mali, filed an application seeking condonation of a 1,680‑day delay in filing an appeal for enhanced compensation against the State of Maharashtra. The court examined the reasons for the delay as presented by the applicant's counsel, M. L. Dharashive, and the objections …

ASHIRWAD RAMRAO GADEversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

Ashirwad, the petitioner, filed a contempt petition (No. 267 of 2010) against the State of Maharashtra and others, seeking enforcement of a prior contempt order. The petitioner’s counsel, Adv. Yashraj H. Gaherwar, submitted that the respondent had complied with the contempt order. The court, after …

RAJENDRA KANTILAL CHOPDA AND ANOTHERversusVIVEK AGARAWAL AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioners Rajendra Kantilal Chopda and another filed a contempt petition against respondents Vivek Agarawal and another. The petition sought relief on the ground that the respondents had allegedly failed to comply with a prior court order. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that Respondent No. …

VASANTRAO PRALHADRAO MULAVEKARversusPRATAPSINGH HANSRAJSINGH CHAUHAN AND ANR

DISMISSED

The original complainant, Pratapsingh, appealed a trial court judgment that acquitted Vasantrao Mulavekar of an offence under Section 500 IPC. Pratapsingh died before the appeal was decided. His heirs filed a criminal application seeking to be recognized as his legal representatives and to continue …

AJEET BHAUSAHEB JAGDHANE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

A contempt petition (No. 352 of 2020) was filed by Ajeet Bhausaheb Jagdhane against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner did not appear before the court. The court was directed to decide the petitioner's representation, but a communication dated 28‑09‑2020 from the Assistant Commissioner, Social …

SHAILAJA UTTAMRAO PATILversusRAJARAM MANE

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Shailaja Uttamrao Patil, filed a contempt petition alleging disobedience of a 2012 order that directed her transfer within a 30 km radius for the convenience of her couple. The order was issued by the trial court and the petitioner allegedly failed to comply. The High Court examined …

STATE OF MAHAversusMADHUKAR KISHAN JAGTAP DIED LRS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed a conviction of Nilkantrao Apparão Patil, and a subsequent order dated 24 August 2026 was issued by the Court. The respondent's counsel, Mr. S.V. Mundhe, moved the Court to correct the minutes of that order, pointing out that the phrase ‘under section 28 of the Act’ …

ANIL BIHARILAL JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Anil Biharilal Joshi, filed a contempt petition (No. 228 of 2013) against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petitioner, through counsel, argued that due to the passage of time, the petition had become infructuous. The Court examined whether the petition remained maintainable …

GITA SUBHASH PRADHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Gita Subhash Pradhan filed writ petition No. 7427 of 2019 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging actions of the State of Maharashtra. The petition was pleaded by Advocate Kulkarni M. A. and the respondents were represented by D. R. Korde. The Court examined the …

SHIVAJI NAMDEV SHELKEversusTHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Shivaji Namdev Shelke filed writ petition No. 6019 of 2023 challenging proceedings initiated against him for moving a no‑confidence motion. The petitioner alleged that the proceedings were unjust and sought relief from the District Collector and other respondents. During the hearing, counsel for the …

KASTURABAI VINAYAK PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The writ petition filed by Kasturabai Vinayak Pawar against the State of Maharashtra was dismissed because the underlying dispute application (No.38 of 2017) had already been disposed of, leaving nothing for consideration. Consequently, the court disposed of the petition.

PRIYANKA D/O KEDAR NAJANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Priyanka D/o Kedar Najan filed Writ Petition No. 6790 of 2025 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging certain actions of the State of Maharashtra. Subsequently, on instructions, her counsel sought the Court's permission to withdraw the petition. The petition was listed before a …

MARUTI BABASAHEB WAGHMODEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Maruti Babasaheb Waghmode was arrested in Crime No.217 of 2026 for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the POCSO Act, including assault, threats, and alleged outraging of modesty. The applicant sought regular bail, arguing that the allegations against him were limited to abusive language, …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusGOVIND LAXMAN PAWAR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The land of Govind Laxman Pawar was acquired in 1993 for the Sarvadi Medium Project and the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer was deemed inadequate, especially regarding the value of the land and the trees and structures on it. Pawar appealed for enhanced compensation for the land …

DEVIDAS DWARKOJI JADHAVversusARUN LAXMANRAO KARPE

DISPOSED OFF

In Contempt Petition No. 314 of 2012, the respondent filed an affidavit on 7 September 2012 stating that it had paid the petitioner the provident fund amount of Rs.2,69,843 and gratuity amount of Rs.95,096 as ordered. The court examined the affidavit and found that the order under contempt had been …

BALASAHEB BABAN BALODE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, heard a large number of criminal applications and writ petitions filed against the State of Maharashtra. The Court, noting that many petitions required amendment, extended the time for filing such amendments by four weeks from the date of the order, granting …

GANGAPRASAD SITARAM PANDVIRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Gangaprasan, aged 64, was arrested in connection with a murder case (Crime No.29 of 2026) for alleged instigation of his son Manohar, who allegedly assaulted and caused the death of Shaikh Faruq. The FIR alleged that after the assault, the applicant encouraged his son to continue the …

RAVINDRA BHAGWAN HIWARDEversusISHWAR DHANRAJ PAWAR

Transfer to other court

The applicant, Ravindra Bhagwan Hiwarde, filed a leave application seeking permission to appeal an acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He requested that the appeal be transferred to the District and Sessions Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium …

SALIMABEE HAJIMIYANversusBALAJI VAIJNATH KADAGE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioners filed two writ petitions (Nos. 7347 and 7350 of 2015) in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The petitioners, through counsel, sought leave to withdraw the petitions while reserving the right to pursue any appropriate remedy. The Court granted liberty to withdraw and ordered the …

SALIMABEE HAJIMIYANversusGODAVARI VAIJNATH AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioners filed two writ petitions (Nos. 7347 and 7350 of 2015) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The petitioners, through counsel, sought leave to withdraw the petitions while preserving the right to pursue any appropriate remedy. The Court examined the maintainability of the …

SURESH S/O BALBHIM PALVEversusPANDHARINATH S/O VINAYAK PALVE

Rejected at Admission stage

The petitioners filed a civil revision seeking to set aside a trial court order that rejected their application to stay a second suit for partition. They argued that the second suit was barred under Order II Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, on the ground of res judicata. The respondent …

PRAKASH ASHOKRAO MARKADversusJYOTI CHANDRAKANT KASALIWAL

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, a medical practitioner, filed a private criminal complaint alleging that the respondent cheated him by selling a plot that was later attached by the bank. The trial court acquitted the respondent under Section 420 of the IPC, finding no proof of intent to cheat. On appeal, the …

SHIVDATT SHRIRANG DHASversusBAPUSAHEB GITARAM KARDILE

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants sought leave to appeal against orders of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran, they requested that the matters be transferred to the District and Sessions Court and treated as …

SHIVDATT SHRIRANG DHASversusBAPUSAHEB GITARAM KARDILE

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed applications for leave to appeal against orders of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. They sought transfer of these applications to the District and Sessions Court, invoking the Supreme Court's decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran. The High …

SHIVDATTA SHRIRANG DHASversusBAPUSAHEB GITARAM KARDILE

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants filed applications for leave to appeal against orders of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. They invoked the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran (2025) to argue that such applications should be transferred to the District and …

PRATIK BALAJI SANAPversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Pratik Balaji Sanap, filed an anticipatory bail application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. Subsequently, the applicant instructed his counsel to withdraw the application. The counsel submitted written instructions to the court, which were recorded and marked for …

SHRIKISHAN MADANLAL MANTRIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

ABATED

The appellant in a criminal appeal died on 23 September 2023. The court attempted to contact the appellant's legal heirs to determine if they would continue prosecution, issuing a notice that was returned undelivered. The appellant's counsel submitted the service report of the notice. The court …

SOMESHWAR RAMCHANDRA SATBHAIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Someshwar Ramchandra Satbhai, filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 858 of 2022 before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petition remained inactive, with no effort made by the petitioner to advance the matter since …

NILKANTH RAOJI KULKARNIversusTHE STATE OF MAH and ANR

DISMISSED

The appellant's land was acquired in 1988 for the submergence of a reservoir, and an initial compensation award was made in 1991 based on fixed rates per hectare. Dissatisfied, the appellant filed a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for a proper determination of market value. …

SAYLI W/O. GANESHKUMAR BHAPKAR AND ANOTHERversusGANESHKUMAR ASHOK BHAPKAR

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Sayli w/o Ganesekumar Bhapkar and another, filed a criminal revision application (No. 2033 of 2022) seeking relief against an order. The application was filed 23 days after the prescribed period, prompting a request for condonation of delay. The learned counsel argued that the delay …

STATE OF MAHAversusNAGU KESHAV JAGTAP

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed a criminal conviction of Nilkantrao Apparão Patil. During the pendency of the appeal, a motion was filed to correct the minutes of an earlier order dated 24‑08‑2026, specifically to insert the words ‘under section 28 of the Act’ after the term ‘interest’ in …

THE STATE OF MAH.versusRAMESH LAXMINARAYAN BANGAD

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of Ramesh Bangad on charge of cheating under Section 420 IPC and sought enhancement of the one‑month sentence imposed for criminal breach of trust under Section 406 IPC. The prosecution alleged that Bangad, as chairman of a cooperative housing society, …

SHASHIKANT SHIVANAND ZURALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The applicant, represented by Ms. Vaishali Shinde, filed a criminal application seeking suspension of sentence. During the hearing, counsel informed the court that the applicant no longer wished to pursue the suspension and instead wanted to withdraw the application. The learned judge considered …

FAYEEM SHAFI DESHMUKH AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants filed a criminal revision application before the High Court instead of the Sessions Court, realizing the error and seeking the court’s permission to withdraw the filing and re‑file in the proper forum. The learned counsel for the applicants requested liberty to withdraw the revision …

DR. BHARATI D/O. BALBHIMRAJ GOREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

Dr. Bharati D/o Balbhimraj Gore filed Criminal Revision Application No. 78 of 2021 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging a decision of the lower court. While the application was pending, the applicant sent a mail to the court indicating that she no longer wished to prosecute …