Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

VITTHAL DINKARRAO DESHMUKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal
APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The court ordered that the erroneous reference to the informant executing the sale deed be corrected to reflect that the co‑accused executed it, and a fresh copy of the order be uploaded.

Summary

The applicant, Vitthal Dinkarrao Deshmukh, filed a criminal application seeking correction of a clerical error in the court's order dated 10 September 2026. The order mistakenly stated that the informant executed the sale deed, whereas the admitted position was that the co-accused executed the sale deed in favour of the applicant. The applicant moved the court to rectify this discrepancy. The bench, after noting the admitted facts, directed that the necessary correction be made and a fresh copy of the order be uploaded. The order thus ensures the record accurately reflects the parties' positions regarding the sale deed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the court should correct the erroneous statement in its order regarding who executed the sale deed.

Subjects

  • court order correction
  • criminal application
  • sale deed
  • procedural error
  • high court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43127-DB
                 This Order is Speaking to Minutes order of order dated //




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              944 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 635 OF 2024

                                VITTHAL DINKARRAO DESHMUKH
                                              VERSUS
                          THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
                                                 ...
           Mr. A. P. Deshmukh h/f Mr. M. S. Shaikh, Advocate for Applicant
           Mr. S. B. Narwade, APP for Respondent No. 1
           Ms. S. G. Chincholkar, Advocate for Respondent No. 2


                                                                  CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                                                  DATED      : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2026

           PER COURT :-

           1.     This motion is moved for speaking to the minutes wherein in order

           dated 10.09.2026 in paragraph 3 it is inadvertently mentioned that the

           Informant has executed the sale deed. Since admitted position is that co-

           accused has executed the sale deed in favour of the Applicant, necessary

           correction is required in the order.

           2.     In view of this, necessary corrections be carried out and fresh copy be

           uploaded accordingly.

                                                                             ( R. M. JOSHI, J.)
           ssp




           criapln635.24.odt                                                                      1 of 1


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.