Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Judgments of 2026

20841 judgments · newest first · showing 7201–7400

BABURAOL MANIKRAO JANGAPALLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The appellants, comprising original land claimants, and the acquiring body filed appeals and cross‑objections against a 2010 judgment that enhanced compensation for land acquired for the Tambat‑Sangvi Storage Tank Project. The court noted that the same factual controversy had already been decided in …

SUBHASH BABURAO YADAV AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The Central Railway acquired land in Hanumantwadi village for a broad‑gauge line and awarded compensation of Rs.1170‑Rs.1420 per square foot. The claimants sought Rs.50 per sq. ft., which the Reference Court enhanced to Rs.2500 per sq. ft. The acquiring body appealed the award, while the claimants …

SHIVANAND BHAGWANRAO MEHETREversusKAVITA SHIVANAND MEHETRE AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Shivananand Bhagwanrao Mehetre, filed a criminal revision (904 CRR No. 237 of 2026) challenging a decision of the trial court. The applicant's counsel argued that the trial court proceedings had been withdrawn, so there was no longer any cause of action to support the revision. The …

Yashoda so Daulat KoliversusThe Secretary, Tribal Development Department

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Yashoda So Daulat Koli, filed a continuous petition seeking relief against the Secretary, Tribal Development Department, alleging that her tribal claim had not been decided. The learned Additional Government Pleader (AGP) had earlier assured the court that the claim would be decided …

GANESH S/O. SAHEBRAO JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Ganesh S/o. Sahebrao Jadhav, filed a criminal revision application before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. The applicant, through counsel Shri Bhosle Santosh C., sought leave to withdraw the revision. The issue before the court was whether the applicant could …

HUZEFA GULAM MOHAMMAD RANDERAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Withdrawn

The petitioner, Huzefa Gulam Mohammad Randera, filed a criminal writ petition challenging a Look Out Circular that barred his travel abroad. He later moved the court seeking to withdraw the petition while reserving the right to contest the circular through other appropriate legal proceedings. The …

JAYESH DAYARAM GANGAWANEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The appellant, Jayesh Dayaram Gangawane, was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment for stabbing his sister's husband, Arbaj, on 3 February 2023. He filed an application seeking suspension of the sentence and bail pending his appeal, alleging that the trial court erred in relying on …

ASHOK BAPURAO LAGADversusBALAJI RAMBHAU LAGAD AND OTHERS

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Ashok Bapurao Lagad, filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 56‑day delay in filing an appeal. The application was heard before Justice Sanjay A. Deshmukh, who noted that the delay was not deliberately caused. The court held that, in the interest of justice, the delay …

SAKHARAM HARIBHAU DESHMUKH AND ANOTHERversusSACHIN PRALHAD DEVKAR AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Petitioners Sakharm Haribhai Deshmukh and another filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging actions of respondent Sachin Pralhad Devkar and others. The petitioners later reached a settlement with the respondents in the civil court proceedings. On 6 August …

KALIDAS PANDURANG THIGLEversusMEERA PRADEEP BORALKAR AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 370‑day delay, setting aside an abatement, and permission to include the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.3, Ramchandra Deshpande. The High Court examined the application and noted that the delay was not deliberate …

KAJAL NARENDRA SURYAVANSHIversusNARENDRA RAMESH SURYAVANSHI

Rejected at Admission stage

The applicant sought transfer of Marriage Petition No. B‑9 of 2026 from the Family Court at Nashik to the Family Court at Ahilya Nagar, alleging a 150 km distance, lack of means of earning, and caregiving responsibilities for her father. She also highlighted pending proceedings before the Ahilya …

SHRIKANT SUHAS PAWARAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners challenged clauses 4.1, 4.3, 4.5 and 4.7 of a Government Resolution dated 07‑08‑2012 that barred medical officers in government, semi‑government and local self‑government hospitals from engaging in private practice. The High Court noted that a prior judgment in Writ Petition No. 6549 …

SANDIP DINKAR SHIRSATHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

Sandip Dinkar Shirsath filed an anticipatory bail application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking protection from arrest. The Court, after hearing counsel for both parties, expressed a disinclination to grant any relief. Consequently, the applicant's counsel, on instructions, …

VIJAY KHEMA RATHOD AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The appellants, Vijay Khema Rathod and another, filed a criminal appeal before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. While the appeal was pending, the trial court filed a charge-sheet against them. The appellants' counsel then moved the High Court seeking to withdraw the appeal and requested …

VANDANA GANESH WAGHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Vandana Ganesh Wagh, filed a writ petition in 2021 challenging an action of the State of Maharashtra and others. The petition remained pending for several years, during which the term of the concerned Gram Panchayat expired. The petitioner failed to appear in court, either in person …

SUNANDA ASHOK JAIN AND ANOTHERversusSANJAYKUMAR MISHRILAL KASLIWAL AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging a civil court's order rejecting their application to amend the plaint of a suit for declaration and perpetual injunction to include a prayer for partition and separate possession. The amendment was sought after a temporary injunction was granted, and …

The Executive EngineerversusRavindra Ramchandra Potdar

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The Executive Engineer, acting as the Acquiring Body, filed a civil application seeking the Court’s permission to deposit a cheque representing compensation ordered on 21 November 2025. The Court had previously directed the Acquiring Body to deposit the entire compensation amount within a stipulated …

SHIVAJI SHESHRAO KADAMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

Shivaji Sheshrao Kadam appealed against the State of Maharashtra alleging that he was unaware of a crime registered against him because his name was omitted from the FIR. The prosecution objected, presenting documentary evidence that Kadam had knowledge of the alleged offence. The appellant's …

GAURAV VIJAY DESHMUKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The High Court considered three anticipatory bail applications arising from an assault case registered as Crime No. 179/2026 under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The first applicant, Gaurav Deshmukh, withdrew his application, which was dismissed as withdrawn. The remaining applicants, Bhavesh Sunil …

PANDHARI KONDIBA KAMBLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The appellant, Pandhari Kondiba Kamble, challenged the compensation awarded in 2017 for dry land acquired for the ‘Lendi’ project in Marajwadi village, Nanded, seeking a higher rate of Rs 1,25,000 per hectare based on the court’s consistent awards in similar acquisitions. The State of Maharashtra …

PAWANKUMAR RAJENDRA MUTHAversusTHE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

Transfer to other court

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, listed a large number of writ petitions for hearing in compliance with a Supreme Court judgment dated 10 April 2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh. The petitioners sought to challenge the constitutional validity of Section …

MOHANRAO WAMANRAO SIRSAT AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants, Mohanrao Wamanrao Sirsat and another, filed a criminal application seeking to raise all points before the trial court after the charge had already been framed. They requested permission to withdraw the application. The primary issue was whether the court could allow withdrawal of the …

ASHOK TUKARAM BHALERAO AND ANOTHERversusRAMESH NAMDEV PADOL AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, owners of land Gut Nos. 88 and 89, challenged an order of the Tahsildar, Bhokardan issued under the Mamlatdar Courts Act directing the Circle Officer to remove road obstructions adjoining their land. They argued that they were not made parties to the proceedings and that the order …

KALYANI ANIL KADUversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

Multiple applicants filed anticipatory bail applications (Nos. 1482‑1486 of 2025) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking protection from arrest in pending criminal proceedings. While these applications were pending, the trial court (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhule) discharged the …

RUPESH VILAS AMRUTKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, considered five anticipatory bail applications filed by Rupesh Vilas Amrutkar, Kalyani Anil Kadu, Hemlata Hemant Kubal, Durgesh Rajendra Chandurkar and Kavita Sunil Kokil against the State of Maharashtra. While the applications were pending, the trial …

HEMLATA HEMANT KUBALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants filed anticipatory bail applications (Nos. 1482-1486 of 2025) before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking protection from arrest in pending criminal proceedings. While these applications were pending, the trial court (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhule) discharged the …

EKNATH PRABHAKARRAO DESHMUKHversusMAHADU HARIBHAU KHADE AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Eknath Prabhakarrao Deshmukh, challenged the order of the District Judge‑1, Jalna, which had vacated a temporary injunction granted by the trial court in Civil Suit No.259 of 2022. The trial court had earlier imposed a temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner, which was set …

DURGESH RAJENDRA CHANDURKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, considered a batch of anticipatory bail applications (Nos. 1482-1486 of 2025) filed by five individuals against the State of Maharashtra. While the applications were pending, the trial court (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhule) discharged the applicants in …

KAVITA SUNIL KOKILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants filed anticipatory bail applications (Nos. 1482-1486 of 2025) before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, seeking protection from arrest in pending criminal proceedings. While these applications were pending, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhule, discharged the applicants in …

SAHIL RAJU SAYYADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISMISSED

The appellant, Sahil Raju Sayyad, filed Criminal Appeal No. 682 of 2026 despite having already obtained regular bail in a related case and having a separate appeal, Criminal Appeal No. 215 of 2026, decided in his favour on 17 August 2026. No counsel appeared for the appellant, and the State's …

YADAV BHAURAO GAIKWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, a farmer, claimed that 29 R of his land acquired in 2005‑06 was done without proper notice and that no compensation had been paid, seeking compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The …

ANIL BHAGWAN SHIRSATHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Anil Bhagwan Shirsath, filed a continuation petition (No. 147 of 2016) seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petition concerned a proposal dated 17 June 2013 that the court had earlier directed to be decided. On 3 June 2016 the court issued an order deciding …

SAYYED SADEK SAYYED MUKHTARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Sayyed Sadek Sayyed Mukhtar, filed a bail application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the pendency of the application, the investigating agency completed its investigation and filed a charge sheet. The applicant’s counsel sought permission to withdraw the …

DNYANESHWAR @ MANOJ BALAJI HARKALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The petitioners Dnyaneshwar @ Manoj Balaji Harkal and Vishal Kashinath Khetre filed criminal appeals before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The matter before the court was a request for an extension of time for the disposal of Sessions Case No. 01 of 2021. The court examined the reasons set …

GANESH SANTOSH NALWADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Ganesh Santosh Nalwade, filed a bail application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The applicant's counsel, Mr. Ganesh J. Kore, sought leave to withdraw the application. The Court granted the request, resulting in the bail application being disposed of as withdrawn. No …

BHAVESH SUNIL MAHAJANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The High Court considered three anticipatory bail applications arising from an assault case registered as Crime No. 179/2026 under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The first applicant, Gaurav Deshmukh, withdrew his application, which was dismissed as withdrawn. The remaining applicants, Bhavesh Sunil …

MANIK MACHINDRA GHOLVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The applicant, Manik Machindra Gholve, filed an application seeking condonation of a 2,957‑day delay in filing a first appeal against the State of Maharashtra. The High Court noted that the respondent State’s advocate was present, but the acquiring body (Respondent No.2) was not. The court examined …

MANGESH VINODRAO LOLGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Mangesh Vinodrao Lolge was arrested on 12 July 2026 for alleged possession of a country‑made pistol and alleged intent to sell it, invoking Sections 3/25 and 7/25 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. The prosecution relied on information from a police constable but offered no concrete evidence that the …

GOPAL S/O. BHIKCHAND AGRAWALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Gopal, sought quashment of FIR No.179/2019 filed for alleged fraud and forgery relating to agricultural land, contending that an earlier FIR No.150/2016 covered the same transaction and that a second FIR violated the principle against double prosecution. The respondents argued that …

RAMCHANDRA DINKAR KHARCHE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The appellants, two Gramsevak, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, for demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs.7,000 in exchange for copies of land records, under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The prosecution relied on a trap …

AMOL DHARMA KHAIRNARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Amol Dharma Khairnar, filed a criminal application (No.3458 of 2026) seeking to challenge the trial court's taking of cognizance and the charge‑sheet. During the pendency of the application, the charge‑sheet was filed and cognizance taken, prompting the applicant to request permission …

SWAPNIL JAGGNATH SHELKEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

Swapnil Jaggnath Shelke filed Writ Petition No. 13329 of 2021 challenging actions of the State of Maharashtra and other respondents. During the pendency of the petition, the term of the Gram Panchayat concerned expired. The petitioner argued that the expiry rendered the petition infructuous. The …

SUSMITA HARSH CHAPPALWAR.versusHARSH NARSINGRAO CHAPPALWAR.

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The petitioner, Susmita Harsh Chappalwar, filed an application to withdraw Rs.4,50,000 deposited by her husband, the respondent, as arrears of maintenance for their minor daughter, Aradhya. The respondent had no objection to the withdrawal but insisted the funds be used solely for the child's needs. …

PRAKASH BABURAO BHUSAREversusPRIYA SANJAY DAVAHALE AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Priya Davahale, sister‑in‑law of a deceased doctor who committed suicide, sought discharge under Section 250 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from charges under Sections 80, 85 and 108 r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The trial court rejected the …

PRADIP S/O. RAMRAO SHINDE AND OTHERSversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners filed a criminal writ petition seeking a direction for attachment of properties under Section 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999. The Assistant Public Prosecutor placed on record a communication dated 20 August 2026 along …

SABIYABEGUM MAHMOOD KHAN AND OTHERSversusTAHSILDAR REVENUE NANDED AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants filed two civil applications seeking to recall the High Court's order dated 09‑10‑2024 in Writ Petition No.11267/2024, which had directed the Tahsildar to decide on a representation filed on 22‑08‑2024 within three months. After a contempt petition, the authorities eventually decided …

ANANDA PATILBA TUPEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

APPLICATION ALLOWED

Ananda Patilba Tupe, a retired Avval Karkun who has not received his pension for over a decade and suffers from health ailments, was acquitted on 18 March 2026 by a Special Judge of charges under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The State subsequently filed …

VENKAT KISHANRAO TELANGversusSHAKUNTALABAI W/O RAMESH SUTAR

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicant, Venkat, filed an application for leave to appeal after his complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Latur, invoking Section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code on the ground of alleged lack of interest. The …

THE STATE OF MAH AND ANRversusDHONDIRAM RAMRAO SURYAWANSHI

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The claimants' lands were acquired for the construction of a Gurnal Storage Tank under a notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The State of Maharashtra filed appeals seeking to reduce the compensation awarded by the Land Reference Court, while the claimants appealed …

THE STATE OF MAH AND ANRversusDATTATRAYA TULSHIRAM BARGE

DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed against a judgment and award dated 17 April 2008 that fixed compensation for land acquired for the Gurnal Storage Tank Project in Deoni Taluka, Latur. The land belonged to the respondent‑claimant, who had been awarded compensation by the Civil Judge Senior Division, …

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORSversusKAMALBAI MANIK KUMBHAR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The lands of several claimants were acquired for the Gurnal Storage Tank project in Latur under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The State of Maharashtra appealed to reduce the compensation awarded by the Land Reference Court, while the claimants appealed alleging inadequate …

THE STATE OF MAH THR COLLECTOR AND ORSversusHARIDAS RAMBHAU LUGADE AND ANR

PARTLY ALLOWED AND PARTLY DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra and the claimants appealed judgments and awards concerning land acquired for earthquake rehabilitation in villages Pethsangavi and Holi. The original awards had enhanced compensation based on market values determined by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, but the claimants …

ZEESHAN ZAKIR PATELversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS

RULE ABSOLUTE

The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) heard a massive group of writ petitions challenging the cancellation of TET‑2018 and TET‑2019 results of thousands of candidates and their permanent debarment from future TET exams. The Court found that the examination authorities, after police‑initiated …

KHUSHAL SHIVDAS ROOMversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Withdrawn

The applicant, Khushal Shivadas Room, filed a bail application 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 application and to file a …

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORSversusVISHVAMBHAR PARVATRAO BIRADAR

Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute

The State of Maharashtra and the Acquiring Authority appealed to reduce compensation awarded to several claimants whose lands were acquired for a Gurnal Storage Tank project under a single notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants appealed, contending that the compensation was …

SAVITA D/O. MADHAV VINKAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, a warden of an Ashram school, sought quashment of an FIR and charge-sheet filed under Sections 306 r/w 34 IPC and 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act after a girl student allegedly committed suicide. The petitioner argued that the FIR was vague, the victim's own writings indicated a different motive …

Sudarhan Yamaji PandhareversusPallavi Alisa Rias Suarsha Pnhare

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Sudarhan Yamaji Pandhare, filed Writ Petition No. 10450 of 2026 before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Krishna P. Rodge, appeared before the Court and informed that the petitioner wished to withdraw the petition. The Court considered the …

MOHIT ASHOK BAGULversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND ANOTHER

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, an 18‑year‑old student, challenged the order of the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee that invalidated his Tokre Koli tribe certificate, which he needed to secure admission for NEET‑UG 2026. He had produced pre‑constitutional documents (1918 school leaving certificate …

SHIVPRASAD RAMDAS MURMUREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Withdrawn

The applicant, Shivprasad Ramdas Murmure, filed a bail application before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the pendency of the application, the investigating agency filed a charge-sheet against the applicant. The applicant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the bail application …

PUNYARATHA VILAS NAIKversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Withdrawn

The appellant, Punyaratha Vilas Naik, filed a criminal appeal before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. While the appeal was pending, the appellant filed a separate appeal seeking pre‑arrest bail. The appellant's counsel subsequently moved the court to withdraw the original appeal on the …

JAMILABI SHAIKH CHAND AND ORSversusNITIN BHIMRAO PATIL AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The applicants filed an application seeking the court's permission to produce additional documentary evidence in the pending appeal. The court noted that jurisprudence allows such applications to be considered at the time of the final hearing of the appeal. Consequently, the application was not …

Neha Amol BairagiversusAmol Ramesh Bairagi

Rejected at Admission stage

The wife (applicant) filed an application under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking to transfer Marriage Petition No. 379 of 2025 from the 14th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmednagar to the Family Court in Aurangabad. She argued that the …

Yogesh Muralidhar MahaleversusTejashree Yogesh Mahale

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The husband (applicant) filed an application to transfer a Domestic Violence proceeding (PWDVA No. 256/2023) pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalgaon, to the Family Court, Pune. The respondent did not appear or file a reply, indicating no grievance. Evidence, including school …

BABAN NAMDEO KAKDE AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Baban Namdeo Kakde and another, filed a contempt petition (No. 485 of 2012) alleging that the State of Maharashtra and other respondents had committed contempt. The petitioners argued that due to the passage of time and subsequent orders, there was no surviving ground for contempt. …

ASLAM NASIR SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, Aslam Nasir Shaikh, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging the delay in decision on his representation dated 19 June 2025. The representation pertained to an inquiry report dated 3 April 2025. The Court examined whether the State of Maharashtra, through its …

DAMODHAR DEVRAO NEVHAL AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioners, Damodhar Devrao Nevhal and another, filed writ petition No. 12020 of 2021 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The petition was listed for hearing on 6 August 2026. No representative of the petitioners appeared in the courtroom or via video conferencing when the matter …

HARIDAS DIGAMBAR GADGADE AND OTHERSversusTHE STAE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OHTERS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions filed by former government employees sought recalculation of their pension benefits to include the notional annual increment on their last drawn salary. The petitioners argued that they were entitled to the difference in pensionary benefits, provided they had worked …

SAMBHAJI GOVINDRAO SINDGE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

A large group of writ petitions filed by former government employees sought recalculation of their pension benefits to include the notional annual increment of their last drawn salary. The petitioners argued that they were entitled to such benefits provided they had served at least six months in the …

UKHARDU RAWA PATILversusNIMBABAI HIMMAT PATIL AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The petitioner, originally Defendant No.5 in a civil suit seeking cancellation of a sale deed and a permanent injunction, challenged a temporary injunction granted by the Junior Civil Judge. An appeal against that injunction was filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and was …

MOHAN RAOSAHEB PATIL AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

DISPOSED OFF

The Bombay High Court heard a large group of writ petitions filed by former government employees seeking enhanced pension benefits. The petitioners argued that their pension should be calculated on the basis of the notional annual increment in their last drawn salary, and that they were entitled to …

SAGAR SHRIVALLABH LOYAversusTHE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER

Transfer to other court

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, listed a large number of writ petitions for hearing in compliance with a Supreme Court judgment dated 10 April 2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh. The petitioners sought to challenge the constitutional validity of Section …

SAGAR SHRIVALLABH LOYAversusTHE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER

Transfer to other court

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, listed a large number of writ petitions pending before it in compliance with a Supreme Court judgment dated 10 April 2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh. The petitioners sought to challenge the constitutional validity of …

SAGAR SHRIVALLABH LOYAversusTHE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER

Transfer to other court

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, listed a large number of writ petitions pending before it in compliance with a Supreme Court judgment dated 10 April 2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh. The petitioners sought to challenge the constitutional validity of …