Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

20841 judgments · newest first · showing 6401–6600

NAVNATH BHAUSAHEB SHINDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

Navnath BhauSaheb Shinde applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 3(5) and 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging cheating in a marriage‑related transaction. The prosecution alleged that Shinde facilitated the introduction of a girl to the complainant and was …

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORSversusSIDRAM CHANAPPA MILGIRE AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The case involved a large group of first appeals arising from a common land acquisition proceeding for a minor irrigation project in Latur, where claimants challenged the compensation awarded by the Reference Court and the acquiring body sought to overturn it. The Reference Court had fixed …

GOKUL CHADANMAL SINGHAVIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The High Court of Bombay heard a group of sixteen first appeals arising from land acquisition proceedings for the Tapi Minor Irrigation Project in Dhule, where the appellants' dry lands were acquired on a compulsory basis. The reference Court had fixed compensation at Rs.1,20,000 per hectare (or …

JAYRAM DADARAO KALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Jayram filed a writ petition seeking relief concerning the disability certification of his minor daughter. The High Court ordered the petitioner to appear before a Medical Officer for the examination of the child. The petitioner complied, and the child was examined as directed. The Court …

CHANDRAKANT RUSTUMRAO MOREversusDATTATRAY KESHAVRAO MORE AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

Chandrakant Rustumrao More filed a contempt petition alleging that the respondents had not complied with an order to pay subsistence allowance. The petitioner’s counsel claimed the petitioner had died on 30‑12‑2013. The respondents produced a statement of account showing that the allowance had been …

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION LATURversusSUBHASH MANMATH CHAPULE

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Latur filed a civil application seeking to set aside the order dated 05.05.2026 passed by the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court. The applicant argued that the order was erroneous and that the matter required removal of office objections. The …

THE STATE OF MAHversusSHAIKH NASIR SHAIKH SAHEBLAL

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of Shaikh Nasir Shaikh Saheblal, who was charged under Section 409 IPC for alleged misappropriation of Rs.88,030.70 while serving as secretary of a cooperative society. The accused failed to produce the cash during an audit but later deposited the …

ROHIT DIVAKAR PAWAR.versusGAJANAN BHARATRAO KULKARNI AND ANR.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

Rohit Divakar Pawar filed a civil application before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, against Gajanan Bharat Rao Kulkarni and another respondent. The applicant was represented by Mr. Ashutosh S. Kulkarni, while the second respondent was represented by Mr. Swapnil S. Rathi. …

DNYANESHWAR BHANUDAS GAIKWADversusRUKHMABAI DNYANESHWAR GAIKWAD AND OTHERS

DISMISSED

The husband appealed a maintenance order of Rs. 4,000 per month imposed by the JMFC, Jamner, and a subsequent dismissal of his criminal appeal by the Sessions Judge. He contended that the amount was excessive and that he lacked sufficient earning capacity to pay it. The Court examined whether the …

SANGHARATNA NARAYAN CHAUDANTEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Sangharatna Narayan Chaudante, filed Writ Petition No. 9713 of 2015 in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petitioner, through Advocate Rahul M. Gaikwad, later moved the Court requesting leave to withdraw the …

VINOD HARI INGLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The applicant, Vinod Hari Ingle, filed a criminal revision application seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra. The Court, after hearing the applicant's counsel, expressed disinclination to grant any relief. The applicant's counsel then requested permission to withdraw the application. The …

DASHRATH RANGRAO KOTGIREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

Dashrath Rangrao Kotgire applied for bail before the charge-sheet against him was approved. The applicant’s counsel requested the court to direct the investigating authorities to approve the charge-sheet promptly so that a fresh bail application could be filed thereafter. The court noted that the …

VASANT SHIVAJI WADIKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad bench) entertained a criminal application filed by Vasant Shivaji Wadikar seeking suspension of his sentence and bail pending the hearing of his appeal against a conviction under IPC sections 397 and 201. The applicant, who was 21 years old at trial and had been …

RAMESHWAR SUKHDEV RAJALE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, Rameshwar Sukhdev Rajale and Vishal Raosaheb Pawar, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for offences under Sections 103(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 45 and 51 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 arising from a violent incident involving …

DEEPAK RAMESH CHETWANIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The petitioner, Deepak Ramesh Chetwani, filed an anticipatory bail application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. After hearing, the court expressed disinclination to grant bail. On instructions, the petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the application. Consequently, the …

PANDURANG FAKIRA TELI AND ORS.versusTHE COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicants filed multiple civil applications seeking condonation of a 1,538‑day delay in filing cross‑objections to first appeals filed by the acquiring body. They argued that the merit of the reference court's award was under challenge and that claimants have a statutory right to seek …

VIJAY SANTOSH KAKDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The petitioner, Vijay Santosh Kakde, filed Bail Application No. 1609 of 2026 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The Court, after hearing the applicant's counsel, expressed its disinclination to grant bail. The applicant's counsel then sought leave to withdraw the bail application. The …

NAGESH ALIAS PRAVIN BALASAHEB ALBHARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Nagesh alias Pravin Balasaheb Albhar, who feared arrest in connection with FIR No. 288/2025 alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault, rioting and theft of Rs.5,000. …

VAISHALI RAMDAS BARPHEversusHIRABAI DAMODHAR NARWADE AND ANR

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Vaishali Ramdas Barphe, filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 28‑day delay in filing a second appeal against the order dated 25.11.2026. The delay was alleged to be neither deliberate nor intentional. The court examined the application and considered the interest of …

VINAYAK NANAJI KENDREversusTHE CIDCO BOMBAY AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner filed a contempt petition in 2009 alleging that the respondents had failed to decide a complaint dated 24 December 2001 by the deadline of 30 June 2004, as ordered in a prior contempt order. The court noted that no further action on the contempt petition had been taken after 2013. …

GOVIND TATERAO SURYAWANSHI C NO 50versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Govind Taterao Suryawanshi, filed a criminal writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent (the court handling his appeal) to decide his pending appeal, which has been outstanding since 14 July 2026. The petition raised the issue of undue delay in the disposal of the appeal. …

XYZversusSANTOSH MAROTI BHANDARE AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant, a 25‑year‑old driver, was convicted by the Special POCSO Court for aggravated penetrative sexual assault of a 14‑year‑old girl, under Section 5(l) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC, and was sentenced to seven years’ rigorous …

ASHIK LIYAKAT SARDARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Ashik Liyakat Sardar was arrested in January 2026 for allegedly injecting chemicals into cattle to increase milk yield, facing charges under Sections 123, 210, 274, 276 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 11(1)(g) and 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. The prosecution …

RAJU ANNASAHEB BHUTEKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Raju Annasaheb Bhutekar, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. While the application was pending, the applicant was arrested by the police. Counsel for the applicant informed the court …

TUKARAM DAULAT NHAVI.versusTHE COLLETOR, JALGAON AND ORS.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicants sought condonation of a 1,538‑day delay in filing cross‑objections to first appeals filed by the acquiring body concerning compensation awards. They argued that the merit of the award was under challenge and that filing cross‑objections, rather than separate first appeals, was a …

BALAJI PANDURANG BAMNEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Balaji Pandurang Bamne filed Writ Petition No. 8933 of 2015 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging actions of the State of Maharashtra and other respondents. The petitioner was represented by Mr. Pankaj S. Kokane and Mr. S. T. Veer. The State was represented by Mrs. D. S. Jape …

ZIPARU MADHAV CHAUDHARI AND ORS.versusTHE COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicants filed multiple civil applications seeking condonation of a 1,538‑day delay in filing cross‑objections to first appeals filed by the acquiring body. They argued that the merit of the reference court’s award was under challenge and that filing cross‑objections, rather than separate …

STATE OF MAH and ORSversusGURULING KASHINATH PIMPALE and ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Guruling Kashinath Pimpale, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging certain actions of the State of Maharashtra and others. During the pendency of the petition, subsequent developments occurred that rendered the relief sought by the petitioner moot. The …

NATHABAI BHIKA PARDESHI.versusTHE COLLECTOR, JALGAON AND ORS.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicants filed multiple civil applications seeking condonation of a 1,538‑day delay in filing cross‑objections to first appeals filed by the acquiring body. The applicants argued that the merit of the reference court's award was under challenge and that filing cross‑objections, rather than …

SUNIL RANGNATH LOKHANDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Sunil Rangnath Lokhande filed a writ petition (906 WRIT PETITION NO. 8966 OF 2015) against the State of Maharashtra and other respondents. Respondent No.7, represented by counsel Mr. Anandsing Bayas, contended that the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of time. The Court examined the …

BABURAO S/O. BHIKAJI SABLE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The appellants were convicted by the JMFC, Aurangabad for offences under Sections 143, 332 and 427 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly taking part in an unlawful assembly that damaged electricity department property. The conviction was based solely on the testimony of the …

Rajabhau Maruti PhadversusThe Sate of Maharashtra

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, a landowner whose property was compulsorily acquired, obtained an enhanced compensation award from the Reference Court. The acquiring body deposited 50% of this award in the High Court pending a first appeal. The applicant sought permission to withdraw the deposited amount. The Court …

BHAUSAHEB BABURAO LABHADE AND ANOTHERversusPRAMILA JOHN JADHAV AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners challenged orders rejecting their temporary injunction application and granting police aid to respondents, seeking a direction that the trial courts decide the pending suits within a fixed period while maintaining the status‑quo. The High Court noted that the parties had agreed that …

BHAUSAHEB BABURAO LABHADE AND ANOTHERversusPRAMILA JOHN JADHAV AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioners Bhausaheb Baburao Labhade and another filed writ petitions challenging orders that rejected their application for a temporary injunction and granted police aid to the respondents. They sought a direction that the trial courts handling the underlying suits (R.C.S. No.186 of 2021 and …

KACHRU SHANKAR SHINDEversusRADHABAI TUKARAM SHINDE AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 8007 of 2011 before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. On 16 July 2026 the petitioner failed to appear before the court. The court recorded the petitioner's absence and noted that the petition had been posted for dismissal. Consequently, the writ …

SANTOSH PANDHARI CHAMLEversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ANR

DISMISSED

The appellants, Santosh Pandhari Chamle and Pandhari Vithoba Chamle, appealed against the Civil Judge's Judgment and Award that valued their acquired land at Rs.2,813 per ropani, treating it as seasonally irrigated, and compensated only 12 trees out of 17. They argued that the presence of a well, …

VASANT ATAMARAM BHISE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioners Vasant Atamaram Bhise and others filed a contempt petition against the State of Maharashtra. The respondents filed a reply stating that they had complied with the contempt order. The petitioners, through counsel, sought further relief. The Court examined the compliance claim and found it …

SUMIT SANJAY GODBOLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISMISSED

The applicant, Sumit Sanjay Godbole, filed a criminal revision application (No. 8545 of 2026) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging a decision of the lower court in a criminal matter against the State of Maharashtra. During the hearing, the applicant's counsel sought a …

YASMEEN BEE MAHEMUD BEGversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, a retired teacher and her spouse, filed a writ petition seeking a compassionate appointment for the spouse in a government school, alleging a forthcoming vacancy due to an imminent superannuation. The management argued that there is currently a surplus teacher, no vacancy exists, …

PUNYRATHA VILAS NAIK AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The appellants, having surrendered before the police, filed a criminal appeal but subsequently sought to withdraw it, claiming the appeal had become infructuous. The sole issue before the court was whether the appeal could be dismissed on the ground of being infructuous due to the surrender. The …

SANJAY BHASKARRAO KALEversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Sanjay Bhaskarrao Kale, filed a civil application seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to consider a representation made by the Shirdi Sansthan requesting deployment of CISF personnel at the Shree Saibaba Samadhi Temple. The court granted leave to amend the numbering of …

KANWARSINGH ISHWAR NAIKversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

Kanwarsingh Ishwar Naik filed a First Appeal (No.27726 of 2019) and a related Civil Application (No.27727 of 2019) but the Registrar rejected registration on 16‑11‑2021 due to office objections. The applicant later filed an application for restoration after a delay of 1,606 days, seeking condonation …

YASHWANT KHATRYA WASAVEversusTHE SPECIAL ACQUISITION OFFICER -2 NANDURBAR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The petitioner, Yashwant Khatrya Wasave, sought restoration of a first appeal (No. 17213 of 2023) after the Registrar of the High Court rejected its registration due to unresolved office objections. The petitioner filed a civil application for restoration after a delay of 1,087 days. The Court …

TANVEER SIKANDAR BAGWANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Tanveer Sikandar Bagwan, was arrested for allegedly assaulting members of another family with a chopper, causing injuries to the head, ear, and neck and a small intracranial haemorrhage. The prosecution contended that the applicant was the principal assailant and that his release …

MOGARABEN AJITBHAI VALVI AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, Mogaraben and Kantilal, were arrested for the murder of Kantilal Motiram Valvi and sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was repeatedly harassing applicant No.1, leading to a conspiracy with …

BHARATKUMAR CHANDRAKANT THADKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench disposed of a large group of writ petitions (904‑931) that raised the entitlement of medical officers to engage in private practice and to receive a Non‑Practising Allowance. The Court noted that it had already decided the matter in a common judgment dated 30 …

MOJU RANJIT GAVITversusTHE SPECIAL ACQUISITION OFFICER -2 NANDURBAR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Moju Ranjit Gavit, filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 1,087‑day delay in filing a petition for restoration of his first appeal (No. 17303 of 2023) after the Registrar had rejected its registration on 8 August 2023 due to office objections. The Court examined whether …

NAYUM KHAN YOUNUS KHAN PATHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Nayum Khan, filed a criminal application seeking relief. After the trial court acquitted the accused, the applicant moved the High Court for permission to withdraw the application, arguing that the matter had become infructuous. The learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Rehan Khan, …

DEEPAK BHAGWANRAO SHINDE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The petitioners, Deepak Bhagwanrao Shinde and another, filed a bail application in the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court. The State, through its counsel, informed the Court that the investigation was complete and a charge-sheet would be filed within a few days. Consequently, the petitioners …

TUKARAM BIJAJI GOTE DIED THROUGH LRS ZUMBARBAI AND OTHERS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH THE COLLECTOR, COLLECTOR OFFICE, AURANGABAD AND ORS.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The claimant‑respondent filed a civil application seeking correction of the middle name of applicant No. 4, Santosh Sakharam Gote, which was erroneously recorded as ‘Bijaji’ in the First Appeal. The court noted that the reference court had already corrected the name on 24‑03‑2026. It was further …

PANDURANG APPASAHEB SHINDE AND OTHERSversusSOMNATH RANGNATH SHINDE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, five Shinde brothers, purchased 57.8 acres of land under a certificate issued pursuant to Section 32M of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. Respondent Somnath Shinde sought forfeiture of the land, and the Tenancy Avval Karkun ordered forfeiture under Section …

JAYESH NEHARU SURYAWANSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The High Court considered two criminal applications filed by the original accused in Special Case No. 113 of 2023, seeking suspension of their life and term sentences and bail pending appeal. The accused were convicted under Sections 376‑D, 376‑DA, 363, 366 of the IPC, Section 34, and Sections 4 and …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusDNYANESHWAR @ BALYA S/O. NAMDEV KHARAT

DISPOSED OFF

The State of Maharashtra filed an application seeking condonation of delay in filing a criminal revision against Dnyaneswar, who had been discharged by a Special Judge under Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999. The Special Judge held that more …

NARAYAN BAPURAO SURANG AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Narayan and others, filed a contempt petition (No. 376 of 2010) against the State of Maharashtra and other respondents. The Court had earlier directed respondent No.4, the Executive Engineer, to decide the petitioners' representation. Respondent No.4 filed an affidavit stating that …

ARCHANA MAROTRAO BADHEversusANUSAYA NARANRAO SAWARGAVE

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Archana Marotrao Badhe, filed a review application challenging the order dated 01‑07‑2026 that entertained her writ petitions. She contended that the court had not expressly addressed the issue of territorial jurisdiction and argued that a writ of quo warranto could not lie because …

NANDKISHOR SOMAJI SALVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Nandkishor Somaji Salve, filed a review application seeking to amend the prayer clause of a writ petition judgment dated 07/07/2025, specifically requesting deletion of paragraph No.8 and Clause (ii) which denied him grade‑pay benefits. He argued that a Government decision dated …

ANIL BABAN BARATE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants, Anil Baban Barate and others, filed a criminal application and later sought leave to amend it after the charge sheet was filed and cognizance was taken. The learned advocate for the applicants requested the court’s permission to make the amendment. The bench, relying on the Supreme …

BABAN EKNATH GARKALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Shri Baban Eknath Garkal filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and other respondents. The petitioner alleged that Respondent No.2 had failed to adjudicate several complaints he lodged on 10 September 2024, 7 January …

YOGESH KAILAS LAHANEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Yogesh Kailas Lahane applied for bail in Crime No. 355 of 2026 for allegedly supplying milk dangerous for consumption. The court ordered a chemical analysis, which found formalin in the milk and classified it as sub‑standard under Chapter I, Section 3(1)(zx) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, …

ASHOK ISHWARAPPA DONGREversusSUVARNA SUNIL KOTHARI AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Ashok Ishwarappa Dongre filed a writ petition challenging a July 21, 2018 order of the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jamkhed, which rejected his application for the appointment of a Court Commissioner in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 20 of 2013. The petitioner argued that the suit was …

BABASAHEB TULSHIRAM SARUK AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, considered two writ petitions challenging Clause 3 of a Government Resolution dated 13‑10‑2016, which denied subject‑teacher pay scale benefits to teachers of classes 6‑8. Relying on the Nagpur Bench decision in Ganesh Mahadeo Asekar v. State of Maharashtra, …

SUBHASH SHAHAJI PAWAR AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicants, Subhash Shahaji Pawar and another, filed a bail application before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. During the pendency of the application, the investigating agency completed its investigation and filed a charge sheet. The applicant's counsel, Ms. Vaishali S. Nikalje, …

NAJMEEN DASTAGIR SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The petitioner filed Criminal Application No. 3200 seeking condonation of a 30‑day delay in filing an appeal, which the Court allowed, thereby condoning the delay and disposing of the application. In Criminal Application No. 3201, the Court issued a notice to the State of Maharashtra, setting a …

ABDUL ALMAS ALIAS BABLU ABDUL GAFFURversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Abdul Almas, filed a successive bail application after an earlier bail request was withdrawn by the court. He argued that the trial had progressed, with four eye‑witnesses and a doctor already examined, and that the eye‑witnesses had turned hostile, constituting a change in …

MOHAMMAD JAVEED GULAM MOHAMMADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The applicant sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 351, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for an alleged assault involving an axe and iron rod. He claimed false implication, presenting hotel photographs to support an alibi that he was away …

NAVNATH BALAJI SHEWALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

Navnath Balaji Shewale filed Criminal Application No. 3189 of 2026 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. After hearing counsel, the Court expressed its disinclination to allow the application. The applicant then sought leave to withdraw the application. The Bench granted leave to withdraw. …

NAJMEEN DASTAGIR SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Najmeem Dastagir Shaikh, was convicted by a Fast Track Special Court in Dharashiv for an offence under Section 137(2) of the Bombay Nursing Service, receiving a one‑year imprisonment and a fine, which he had already paid. He had been on bail during the trial and filed an application …

AJITSINGH DAULATSINGH SHILEDARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Ajitsingh Daulatsingh Shiledar, was charged under Sections 132, 79, 351(1) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly abusing officers in a Tahsil office in the presence of female staff. He filed an anticipatory bail application, submitting an affidavit stating that he had …

SHYAMRAO DAGA PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

Shyamrao Daga Patil applied for bail before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the pendency of the bail application, the investigating agency filed a charge-sheet against the applicant. The applicant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the bail application and to file a fresh …

BALRAJE RAMRAO AWAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Balraje Ramrao Aware was arrested in Crime No. 84 of 2026 for alleged unauthorized supply, transportation and installation of statutes, charged under Sections 329(3), 223, 61(2), 353(3), 126(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 11 of the Maharashtra Desecration of Status Act. He filed …

PRAKASH RAJARAM PATIL AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, heard a batch of writ petitions filed by various government employees seeking entitlement to advance increments for work performed before the Government Resolution dated 24 August 2017. The petitioners argued that the resolution should be applied …

THE EX. ENGINEER, M.I.D. JALNA AND ORSversusSANJAY MURLIDHAR MADAN

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The Ex. Engineer, M.I.D. Jalna and others (applicant) filed a civil application seeking relief. The court had earlier granted interim relief pending payment of a payable award. The applicant deposited the entire award amount as directed by the court. The court, noting full payment, converted the …

ARVIND SHRIPATRAO PATILversusSEEMA ARVIND PATIL

DISMISSED

The petitioner Arvind Shripatrao Patil challenged a Family Court order that rejected his application to invoke Sections 215 and 379 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) against his wife for alleged non‑disclosure of a gifted property. The wife had filed a maintenance petition under …

AMAR ASHOK KARALEversusDHANESH MANIKCHAND GUGALE AND ANR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Amar Ashok Karale, filed an application seeking condonation of a 289‑day delay in filing his first appeal. The respondent argued that the applicant had previously deposited over Rs.12,00,000, which had been withdrawn, and therefore no financial hardship existed to justify the delay. …

NILESH SUDHAKARRAO PAWAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The husband and his relatives (father‑in‑law, mother‑in‑law, brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law) applied to quash FIR No.313 of 2025 filed by the wife alleging cruelty and illegal dowry demand under Sections 85 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court observed that the FIR and charge …

JAVED ALIAS PAPPU VISHWAS CHAVANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Javed alias Pappu Vishwas Chavan, filed a bail application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the hearing, the applicant's counsel learned that the prosecution would file the charge-sheet the next day. The applicant sought liberty to withdraw the bail application …

MANGAL PANDURANG PATIL AND OTHERSversusJAISHREE PRABHAKARRAO DESHMUKH

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Mangal Pandurang Patil and others, filed writ petition No. 11820 of 2021 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. They were represented by Advocate Mr. Kailas Hande on behalf of Mr. Avinash D. Hande. The petitioners subsequently sought leave of the Court to …

MUSHRAF ILIYAS KHANversusKALIM GULJAR SHAIKH AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants filed a bail application (Bail Application No. 1449 of 2026) in the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. While the application was pending, the charge-sheet was filed, prompting the applicants to seek withdrawal of the bail application and permission to file a fresh bail …

VIKRAM VINAYAK DEDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISMISSED

Vikram Vinayak Dede applied for anticipatory bail under CrPC. While the application was pending, he was arrested. The applicant's counsel informed the court that the arrest rendered the anticipatory bail application infructuous. The court, noting the change in circumstances, dismissed the …

HAMIDKHAN SARWARKHAN PATELversusOSMANKHAN SARWARKHAN PATEL AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Hamidkhan Sarwarkhan Patel filed Writ Petition No. 8979 of 2015 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging certain actions of Osmankhan Sarwarkhan Patel and others. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the passage of time had rendered the issues in the petition infructuous. The …