Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

20841 judgments · newest first · showing 6601–6800

Shobha Narendra KabraversusState of Maharashtra

DISPOSED OFF

Shobha Narendra Kabra filed a civil application seeking to recall an order of dismissal dated 8 April 2026, alleging that the order was erroneously listed in the unserved category and that she was unaware of it. The petitioner discovered the dismissal when checking the status of the writ petition …

SANTOSH HANUMANT DHAGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Santosh Hanumant Dhage appealed for regular bail in a case alleging forced sexual intercourse and threats, charged under sections 64, 115(2), 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and several provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The victim, a member …

PASHA HUSEN PATEL AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The petitioners, Shakil Khajasab Patel and others, and Pasha Husen Patel and others, applied for anticipatory bail in two separate criminal matters arising from a politically charged incident on 24 June 2026 in Nilanga, Latur. They were charged under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, …

SACHIN MADHUKAR TAYDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Sachin Madhukar Tayde, was arrested for allegedly striking a witness, Sunil, on the head with a stick during a quarrel that originated from a political dispute between the informant and Accused No.1. The prosecution alleged a single simple injury caused by the applicant, while the …

RAHUL RAMDAS DHANAWADE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The wife, Komal Rahul Dhanawade, filed an FIR alleging dowry harassment, physical and mental cruelty, and other offences against her in‑laws and several relatives. The applicants (mother‑in‑law, sisters‑in‑law, brothers‑in‑law and grandmother‑in‑law) moved to quash the FIR, charge‑sheet and …

DADAJI HARCHAND PATIL AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Dadaji Harchand Patil and others, filed a contempt petition (Contempt Petition No. 403 of 2014) against the State of Maharashtra. The petition alleged that an order under contempt had not been complied with. The petitioner's counsel, on instruction, submitted that the contempt order …

ANUPRIT RAJENDRA MOHITE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The wife filed a complaint alleging dowry demands, physical and mental harassment by her husband and his relatives after their marriage on 28‑02‑2023. The husband and his parents, sister‑in‑law and brother‑in‑law filed an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashment of the FIR and …

RAMESH SUKHADEV PATANGE AND OHTERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, who are relatives of the husband, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashment of FIR No.190/2024 alleging offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504 r/w 34 IPC. The FIR was based on a complaint by the wife alleging physical and mental cruelty, monetary …

GUNVANT VITTHALRAO SURYAWANSHIversusDAULAT GUNVANT SURYAWANSHI AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Gunvant Vitthalrao Suryawanshi, filed a criminal revision challenging the order of the Additional Sessions Judge which dismissed his appeal and confirmed a maintenance order of Rs 1,000 per month granted by a village magistrate to his son, who was then a minor. The respondent argued …

SHAYAD SHAIKH ABDUL SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant challenged a Special Court order that denied him regular bail in a case involving multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The FIR related to an assault on the informant's husband, but the …

SHRIKANT SHANKAR CHINDAM AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants, Shri Shankant Shankar Chindam and others, filed a criminal revision application (ST. No. 9585 of 2024) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The applicants, through Advocate Ms. Avantika S. Kharade (holding for Mr. R. R. Karpe), sought the Court's permission to withdraw the …

VISHAL MACHINDRA JAWALEversusJYOTI VISHAL JAWALE

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Vishal Machindra Jawale, filed a criminal revision seeking condonation of a 146‑day delay in filing the revision against an order of the Family Court dated 08‑12‑2025 directing him to pay Rs.2,500 per month as maintenance to his wife, Jyoti Vishal Jawale. The revision challenged the …

SACHIN ANNA KUSALKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Sachin Anna Kusalkar, filed a bail application and subsequently sought to withdraw it, requesting permission to file a fresh bail application after the charge-sheet is filed. The court considered the request and allowed the withdrawal of the present application. It granted the …

RAHUL SHANTILAL PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Rahul Shantilal Patil, filed a bail application (No. 1633 of 2026) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the pendency of the application, the investigation concluded and a charge sheet was filed. The applicant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the bail …

ASHABAI SUBHASH PIMPALE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, adjoining agriculturists, disputed a pathway claimed by the respondents and challenged a Mamlatdar order that granted the respondents right of way. They filed a civil suit seeking a temporary injunction, but the trial court rejected the application, and the first appellate court …

DEVAIBAI W/O BALIRAM KUKADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISMISSED

Devaibai w/o Baliram Kukade filed a criminal revision application (No. 217 of 2018) challenging a prior order. Notices were issued on 26 July 2019 and 6 September 2019, but the applicant never appeared before the court. The learned counsel for the respondents sought time, and the court, noting the …

SANDEEP NAMDEO KHADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The High Court considered applications by Sandeep Namdeo Khade and Kailas Baburao Sonawane seeking suspension of the sentence imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, for conviction under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC in a 2017 case. The applicants argued they were falsely …

KAILAS TULSHIRAM PURNEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

In a criminal appeal filed by Kailas Tulshiram Purne against the State of Maharashtra, the appellant's counsel sought to withdraw the appeal after a charge-sheet was filed during its pendency. The appellant requested liberty to file an application before the Sessions Court instead. The High Court …

DNYANESHWAR SANGRAM GAIKWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Dnyaneshwar Sangram Gaikwad, filed a writ petition challenging a decision of the State of Maharashtra. The Court observed that the matter raised in the petition had already been decided by a coordinate bench of the same High Court in Writ Petition No.6549 of 2026. Relying on the …

YASHODA SURESH CHAVAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants Yashoda Suresh Chavan, Yamuna Namdev Shelke and Jairam Namdev Shelke applied for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 0010/2022 alleging their presence at a disturbance on 14 February 2022 and accusations of abusing and outraging the modesty of an informant. The FIR lists …

RAVINDRA GANESH PAWARAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant sought anticipatory bail in connection with a narcotics case (Crime No. 115 of 2025) involving the seizure of 605 kg of ganja. The FIR, based on secret information, alleged that the applicant was present at the premises and fled, implying his involvement. The applicant contended he had …

SANGRAM PRAKASH KANDEKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Sangram Prakash Kandekar, filed an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act and Section 99 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant argued that there was no direct evidence linking …

PANDIT RUPCHAND IMALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Pandit Rupchand Imale filed a writ petition challenging the denial of benefits under the old pension scheme, contending that his appointment dated 01‑09‑2004 predates the November 2005 cutoff for the new scheme. The petitioner argued that he should be allowed to claim the old pension benefits. The …

THE STATE OF MAHversusSONA MAGAN DHANGAR

DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of Police Head Constable Sona, who was charged under sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for demanding and allegedly accepting a Rs.500 bribe. The prosecution relied on the testimony of the complainant (a State Transport …

NARESH KHEMRAJ JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Naresh Khemraj Joshi, the lessee of a lodge where illegal prostitution was discovered during a police raid, applied for anticipatory bail under Sections 143(3) and 144(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3 to 6 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act. The State argued that the lease …

GULCHAND SUKHDEV KOLHEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The applicant, Gulchand Sukhdev Kolhe, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a suicide case (Crime No. 293/2026) alleging offences under Sections 108, 115(2), 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The FIR alleged that after the deceased repaid a loan, the applicant abused …

HARIDAS AGAJI OLEKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

Haridas Agaji Olekar filed a bail application in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. While the application was pending, the charge-sheet was filed against him. The applicant, through counsel, sought permission to withdraw the bail application and requested liberty to file a fresh bail …

ARJUMAN NAZHAR SHAIKH AND ORS.versusNILESH ARUN GAVADE AND ORS.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

Arjuman and others filed a civil application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against Nilesh and others. The Court, after hearing the matter, allowed the application in accordance with prayer clauses B, C, and D. It directed the applicants to take necessary steps …

NILESH RAJU DEOREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

Nilesh Raju Deore filed an anticipatory bail application before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, seeking protection from arrest in a case instituted by the State of Maharashtra. The learned counsel for the applicant argued for the grant of bail, while the State opposed the relief. After …

BHIMRAO POPAT PATIL AND ANOTHERversusBAPU POPAT PATIL (SHISODE) AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging a suit. The suit was subsequently disposed of, and the petitioners' counsel submitted that no relief remained to be claimed. The court accepted this submission and held that the petition was infructuous. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed. …

MOHSIN RAHIM SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Mohsin Rahim Shaikh, was arrested on 2 April 2026 for allegedly stabbing a man with a knife during a quarrel, causing grievous abdominal injury that required surgery and a 15‑day ICU stay. He is charged under Sections 109(1) and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The …

AKSHAY SUDHAKAR JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Withdrawn

The petitioner, Akshay Sudhakar Jadhav, filed a criminal writ petition challenging the charge‑sheet. He later sought the court's permission to withdraw that petition and to file a fresh petition on the same issue. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested liberty to withdraw and re‑file. The …

PRAKASH PETRAS RANNAWAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The petitioner, Prakash Petras Rannaware, filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 1111 of 2025 in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner’s counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition. The Court granted the request for withdrawal. Consequently, …

SANTOSH NARAYAN WANJAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Santosh Narayan Wanjare, filed a bail application while his case was under investigation. During the pendency of the application, the investigation concluded and a charge sheet was filed. The applicant’s counsel requested permission to withdraw the pending bail application and to file …

MANIK VITHALRAO KATMANDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Manik Vithalrao Katmande was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to 30 days imprisonment plus a compensation of Rs.4.30 lakh. He appealed, but both the Trial Court and the Appellate Court upheld the conviction. He filed a criminal revision under Section 397 of …

ASHRAF AHEMAD MIRZAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Ashraf Ahemad Mirza, sought bail from the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, while the State of Maharashtra opposed the relief. Both parties presented arguments, and the State highlighted material against the applicant. The court, reluctant to grant bail at this stage, allowed the …

DILIP RAMESH PATAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The petitioner, Dilip Ramesh Patare, filed a bail application before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, challenging his detention by the State of Maharashtra. Both parties presented arguments, with the State highlighting material against the petitioner. The Court expressed a disinclination …

KADUBA SANJAY OLEKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Kaduba Sanjay Olekar, filed a bail application in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad bench. During the pendency of the application, the charge-sheet was filed, prompting the applicant's counsel to seek permission to withdraw the bail application and obtain liberty to file a fresh bail …

SACHIN LAXMAN KANTHALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Sachin Laxman Kanthale, filed a bail application in the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. During the pendency of the application, the charge-sheet in the underlying criminal case was filed. The applicant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the bail application and to …

GAUS MUSTAFA SAYYEDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The appellant, Gaus Mustafa Sayyed, was found to have suppressed his criminal antecedents during the pendency of his appeal before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The court, citing the precedent of Zeba Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh, held that an appellant has a duty to disclose any prior …

SURESH PREMRAJ GANDHIversusRAJLAXMI RAJKUMAR SHARMA

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order of the lower authority. The respondent submitted a panchanama dated 22-12-2015 indicating that the challenged order had already been implemented. The court examined the panchanama and found that the relief sought by the petitioner could no …

Santosh S/o Rambhau Jagtap and AnrversusThe Executive Engineer

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The Executive Engineer Seena Kolegaon Project Division and others filed multiple civil applications seeking condonation of a 147‑day delay in filing their appeals, continuation of an interim stay previously granted, and permission to withdraw a portion of an amount deposited by the acquiring body. …

POPTYA ALIAS POPAT SHAHADEV BORUDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, accused in a POCSO case, challenged a Special Judge's order allowing the prosecution to re‑examine a witness (PW4) on the issue of the victim's alleged marriage. The High Court examined whether such re‑examination was permissible and what limits should apply, emphasizing that …

SAGAR BALASAHEB MALVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench considered an application by Sagar Balasaheb Malve, who had been convicted by an Additional Sessions Judge in Ahmednagar for offences under Sections 353, 332 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, receiving a six‑month imprisonment and a fine (already paid). An …

SHAIKH ASIF S/O. ABDUL HAMIDversusMAHEJABEEN W/O. ASIF SHAIKH AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Shaikh Asif, filed a criminal application and a revision seeking relief against the respondent, Mahejabeen. During the pendency of the proceedings, both parties amicably settled their dispute and began residing together. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent …

SATISH HARIBHAU WAGHversusMAYURI SATISH WAGH

DISPOSED OFF

Satish Haribhau Wagh filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging matters related to a family dispute with Mayuri Satish Wagh. The petitioner argued that the family court proceedings were still pending and sought relief through the writ petition. The respondent …

VAIBHAV DILIP SHELKEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Ashok Ramdas Mahajan, filed a bail application (BA/1282/2026) along with a criminal application (CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3251 OF 2026) before the High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the pendency of the bail application, the charge‑sheet was filed. The applicant, through counsel, …

DIGAMBER SOPANRAO MUNDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTR 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 …

RAHUL ARUN TAKversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Rahul Arun Tak filed a criminal writ petition challenging a detention order dated 19 March 2026 issued under the MPDA Act. The petitioner argued that the order should be invalid because the required approval order was not passed within the period prescribed by Section 3(3) of the MPDA …

VISHWANATH KASHINATH SAVLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The Court entertained an application to speak to the minutes of its order dated 8 January 2026, wherein the appointed counsel for Respondent No. 2, Ms Deepali Patil, sought a higher fee than the standard amount prescribed by the rules. Ms Patil argued that the existing fee was meagre. The Court …

AKHATAR KARIM SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving the seizure of a large quantity of contraband gutkha, alleged under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Food Safety and Standards Act. The FIR links the applicant to the crime solely through the statement of a …

KISHORI RAMESH KALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Kishori, the wife of Ramesh Kale, was charged under Sections 420, 498A, 506 (read with 34) IPC for allegedly facilitating a marriage proposal in which the groom, Sumeet Bhosale, misrepresented himself as a doctor. Kishori filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of …

ALI ASGAR SAIFUDDIN PETIWALAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants, Abdul Kashif Khan and Abdul Rahman Khan, filed a bail application in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking release pending the filing of a charge sheet. Their counsel requested permission to withdraw the bail application so that a fresh application could be filed after the …

JAVED ASLAM SHAIKH AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants sought quashing of FIR No.161 of 2023 and the related charge‑sheet, alleging that the allegations against them (applicants 3 to 6) were vague, general and unsupported by specific dates, times or overt acts. The FIR alleged demands for money, abuse, threats and instigation in a …

SHAFIQ OSMAN PATELversusMAHAVIR JUGRAJ ABBAD

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Shafiq s/o Osman Patel, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. Both parties later agreed that the passage of time had rendered the petition ineffective. Consequently, the court found the petition to be infructuous. No substantive legal arguments were …

SHIVAJI CHANDRAKANT THORAVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

Shivaji Chandrakant Thorave 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 …

PURUSHOTTAMDAS GULABDAS SHAHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The claimants' lands in Aurangabad were acquired by CIDCO in 1980 for the New Aurangabad project, with an initial compensation of Rs.7,500 per acre. The claimants protested and obtained a reference which enhanced the market value to Rs.23,000 per acre, but further disputes arose because portions of …

ROHIT MOHAN LATUREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Rohit Mohan Lature, filed a bail application which was pending when the charge-sheet was filed. The applicant's counsel sought to withdraw the bail application, requesting liberty to approach the trial court afresh with the charge-sheet. The court accepted the withdrawal and disposed …

BALVANT RAMRAO AMBADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Balvant Ramrao Ambad, filed a writ petition in 2019 which was ordered to be listed before a Single Judge on 20 August 2019. The petition was not circulated or listed for a long period, and after a hearing on 25 January 2022, no petitioner appeared. The case was finally listed on 12 …

LAXMAN TUKARAM SAWATEversusSUDAM TUKARAM SAWATE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Laxman Tukaram Sawate filed a writ petition challenging a temporary injunction imposed on him by the trial court under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and also contesting the trial court's rejection of his own injunction application. He appealed to the …

ALINA RIYAZ SHAIKH ALIAS ALINA ANIS RAJVIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The petitioner Alina Riyaz Shaikh applied for bail before the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court. During the pendency of the bail application, the prosecution filed a charge‑sheet. The petitioner’s counsel sought permission to withdraw the bail application and to file a fresh application …

X.Y.Z.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Nitesh Ram Chavan, a 23‑year‑old constable, was arrested for alleged sexual offences under Sections 64(2)(m), 69 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, involving a non‑consensual relationship and threats to circulate private photographs. After the investigation was completed and a …

ANITA SAMBHAJI KARDULEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Anita Sambhaji Kardule filed a writ petition seeking directions for the State of Maharashtra and other respondents to decide her applications dated 28 January 2025 and 13 June 2025 within the stipulated period. The court allowed amendment of the petition and, upon the respondents' waiver …

ASHOK GOVINDRAO DAWARGAVEversusGANESH MADHAVRAO THETE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner challenged the order granting status quo on 15 September 2025 and the subsequent order rejecting his application to continue that status quo. The dispute arose from a Section 143 order of the Tahsildar, Nilanga, allowing an 8.25‑foot road through survey nos. 131 and 132, which the …

MANLESH EKNATH JAISWALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

RULE DISCHARGED

The petitioner, Manlesh, alleged that he was illegally tortured and beaten by police officers (Respondents 4‑7) at Shahada Police Station on 18 May 2020 and sought Rs 5 lakhs compensation from the State and the CCTV footage of the station for 18‑20 May 2020. The State argued that criminal cases …

JIJABAI MOTIRAM TAMASKAR AND ANOTHERversusTHE SUB REGISTRAR AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a civil suit in 2020 for partition and separate possession of property. During the suit, they obtained a temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the CPC, restraining the defendants from alienating the property. The defendants appealed, and …

MUKHTAR NUR SAYYEDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Mukhtar Nur Sayyed, filed a bail application before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. During the pendency of the application, the investigating agency filed a charge-sheet in the underlying criminal case. The applicant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the bail …

SAYYED SAMEER SAYYED IBRAHIMversusSHABANA SAMEER SAYYED SAMEER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Sayyed Sameer Sayyed Ibrahim, was ordered on 30 June 2026 to deposit ₹25,000 within two weeks or face automatic dismissal of his criminal revision application. He failed to deposit the amount but later claimed that a demand draft was ready, though the court office would not accept it …

MAHESH PRAKASH SOMWANSHIversusAMOL JIJABRAO PATIL AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner filed a writ petition (12 WRIT PETITION NO. 10936 OF 2017) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petition had become infructuous. The Court, after considering the submission, held that there was no longer any cause of action to be …

SUBHASH SHAKHARAM SHEJWALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Withdrawn

Subhash Shakharam Shejwal filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 1160 of 2026 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and others. The Court, after hearing counsel, expressed its disinclination to grant any relief on the previous date of hearing and …

SIDDHARTH GRIMAJI UGHADE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants sought anticipatory bail in connection with an assault case (Crime No.58/2025) under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, arising from a land‑dispute fight on 14 March 2025. The prosecution alleged that the applicants assaulted the informant and witnesses, producing …

EKNATH S/O. SAMPAT JAYBHAYversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Withdrawn

The petitioner, Eknath, filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 1323 of 2019 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging actions of the State of Maharashtra and other respondents. Counsel for the petitioner, on his instructions, moved the Court seeking to withdraw the petition. The Court …

VIJAY SUKDEO MALI AND OTHERSversusBABAN LIMBHAJI HAKE

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a writ petition (No. 9736 of 2015) challenging an interlocutory order and a subsequent order arising from R.C.S. No.01 of 2014. The petitioners argued that the orders were still open for review. The court observed that R.C.S. No.01 of 2014, which contains the orders in …

NANASAHEB SHRIMANT GADHAVEversusTHE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicants filed a civil application seeking to withdraw a portion of the compensation amount that had been deposited by the insurance company following a tribunal award. The High Court examined the tribunal's endorsement of the applicants' entitlement and the competing interests of the parties. …

ASHOK UMAKANT MATHPATI AND OTHERSversusSHIVKANYA ASHOK MATHPATI AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants filed a criminal application seeking restoration of Criminal Application No. 4305 of 2023, which had been dismissed for want of prosecution on 16 January 2025. They pleaded a delay of 170 days and argued that the reasons for the delay warranted condonation, emphasizing that the …

SAJANBI VAJIR MOMIN AND ORS.versusDATTU VAIJNATH KARAD AND ORS.

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The applicants filed a civil application seeking to withdraw a portion of the compensation awarded to them by a tribunal. The insurance company, as appellant, challenged the tribunal's award and appealed the decision. The High Court examined the tribunal's endorsement of the applicants' entitlement …

Mithun so Machindra SalunkeversusPrakash so Ramji Inkar

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The insurance company appealed against the compensation awarded by a tribunal to the applicants, Mithun S/o Machindra Salunke. The applicants filed a civil application seeking to withdraw a portion of the compensation amount that had been deposited by the insurer pending the appeal. The court …

RAHUL HIRAMAN PAWAR AND ANOTHERversusKIRAN RAMESH RAUT AND OTHERS

Withdrawn

The intervenor, a witness, filed two criminal applications seeking to intervene in separate appeals. On the hearing date, he appeared and objected to relief being granted to the original appellant, then filed the intervention applications. Later, without providing any reason, he sought to withdraw …

PINTU @ ANKUSH BALIRAM RATHODversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Pintu @ Ankush Baliram Rathod, originally accused No.2 in a murder case (Sessions Case No.2 of 2024), sought suspension of his life sentence and bail pending his appeal. The prosecution alleged that the accused entered the deceased's house and, while the victim Vinod was resting, the …

DR. PRAJWALIT SUNDARRAO RAUT.versusSAU. PRIYANKA PRAJWALIT RAUT.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant filed an application seeking restoration of Family Court Appeal No. 72 of 2024, which had been dismissed on 31.07.2026 for non‑prosecution because the appellant allegedly failed to take steps against the respondent. The court noted that the bailiff report indicated the respondent was …

AZHAR SHAMSHODDIN SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The appellants, Shafiq Noorahmed Shaikh and Azhar Shamshoddin Shaikh, were arrested in connection with a road‑rage incident on 29‑04‑2026 in Dharashiv, during which the informant and his brother were assaulted, threatened, and robbed. They were charged under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya …

RAHUL ADINATH BANAGARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Rahul Adinath Bangar was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, in Sessions Case No.104 of 2020 for offences under Sections 353, 332 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Maharashtra Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions Act, and was sentenced to three …

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusRAMESH VITTHALRAO THAKUR AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of two Panchayat Samiti officials, a Block Education Officer (accused No.1) and a clerk (accused No.2), who were charged under Sections 7, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for demanding a bribe to avoid the …

Anita Gajanan BhartiversusGajanan Venkatrao Bharti

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Anita Gajanan Bharti, filed an application seeking the transfer of her divorce petition (Petition No. A‑469/2025) from the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, to the Family Court at Nanded. The respondent, Gajanan Venkatrao Bharti, consented to the transfer, stating that he had also been …

SMITA SAHEBRAO SHINDEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Dr. Smita Sahebrao Shinde filed a writ petition challenging the interview conducted on 24 July 2026 for the post of Associate Professor in History, alleging that she was denied a presentation, the process was biased, and violated UGC regulations and government resolutions. She sought the interview …

PRAMOD VASANT KULKARNIversusCOLLECTORATE OF AURANGABAD AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Pramod Vasant Kulkarni, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The petitioner's counsel was absent on the scheduled hearing date of 10 August 2026. The matter was subsequently posted for dismissal due to the absence. No further representation was made …

MADHURI NAMDEV RAHINJversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioner Madhuri Namdev Rahinj filed a writ petition challenging the State of Maharashtra's inaction on her representation dated 01/06/2026. The petition sought a directive for the State to consider the representation on its merits. The High Court, after hearing counsel for both sides, ordered …

SULTANKHAN GAJIYODINKHAN PATHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Abdul Mukhtar Sattar Patel filed an anticipatory bail application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking protection against arrest. The Court, after hearing counsel for both sides, expressed a disinclination to grant any relief. On the instructions of senior counsel, the applicant …

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.versusVAISHALI VIJAYKUMAR PATIL AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The Special Lok Adalat of the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench, considered a batch of first appeals filed by Reliance General Insurance Co. against various claimants in motor accident claim matters. The court condoned the delay in filing and recorded the insurer's email instruction to withdraw …

VISHNU SARJERAO DABHADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Vishnu Sarjerao Dabhade, a fertilizer retailer, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 after a raid revealed alleged non‑maintenance of records and an expired licence. The prosecution alleged offences under Section 318(4) r/w Sec. 3(5) of the …

TUKARAM PANDITRAO DANDGEversusSMT V RADHA

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a contempt petition alleging that the respondents had not fixed their revised pay as ordered. Respondent No.3 produced a communication dated 13.01.2026 stating that the revised pay, including advance increment, would be fixed under the 6th and 7th Pay Commissions and that the …

EKBAL ABDUL LATIF KABIR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, comprising the husband and his in‑laws, sought quashment of FIR No. 022/2025 and a regular criminal case filed under Sections 85, 86, 115(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The informant, Sana Mujjamil Kabir, alleged that the applicants demanded Rs 5,00,000 and …

TRIMBAK DAYARAM WAYKOLE AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioners Trimbak Dayaram Waykole and another filed contempt petitions (Nos. 462 and 461 of 2012) against the State of Maharashtra alleging non‑compliance with a prior contempt order. The petitioners, through counsel Shinde Shankarrao G., submitted that the State had now complied with the order. …

SHIVAJI JAYAJI GADEKAR AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Trimbak Dayaram Waykole and another, filed contempt petitions (Nos. 462 and 461 of 2012) against the State of Maharashtra. The petitioners' counsel submitted that the order of contempt had been complied with. The Court examined whether any contempt remained pending. Finding that the …

KOHIRKAR NAGAPPA RANANNAversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed Contempt Petition No. 471 of 2012 challenging a contempt order. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the order under contempt had been fully complied with. The court examined the submission and found that compliance removed any remaining grievance. Consequently, the court …

BHAGWAT BALIRAM MUNDHEversusSANJAY JANARDHAN GITTE AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Bhagwat Baliram Mundhe, filed multiple bail applications (Nos. 3295, 3297, 3298, 3299 of 2026) before the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court. The applications sought the release of the applicant on bail pending trial. The Court, after considering the prayers made in clause (B) …

Mahadeo Nivrutti Bhore and OrsversusThe Executive Engineer

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The claimants filed a civil application seeking withdrawal of an amount that the acquiring body had deposited following a court order dated 12.01.2026. The acquiring body complied and deposited the sum on 28.05.2026, prompting the claimants to request its release. The Court held that the claimants …

RUPESH RAJGOPAL ZAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The petitioner, Rupesh Rajgopal Zawar, filed a criminal application seeking condonation of a 121‑day delay in proceeding with Criminal Application No. 4193/2022. The respondent, the State of Maharashtra, opposed the condonation. The court examined the explanation for the delay and found it …