Samiksha Bapu Dhuri vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 6273 Bom
Judgement Date : 16 August, 2017

Bombay High Court
Samiksha Bapu Dhuri vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 16 August, 2017
Bench: A.M. Badar
                                                                 501-WP-4125-2016.doc


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

               CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.4125 OF 2016

 MRS.SAMIKSHA BAPU DHURI                                  )...PETITIONER

          V/s.

 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. )...RESPONDENTS

 Ms.Bhakti Jogal, Advocate for the Petitioner.

 Mr.Vinod Chate, APP for the Respondent - State.

 Mr.Bharat Gavande, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

                               CORAM       :      A. M. BADAR, J.
                               DATE        :      16th AUGUST 2017
 P.C. :


 1                Not on board. Taken on board, on being mentioned for 

 production.



 2                The   learned   advocate   appearing   for   the   respondent 

vehemently opposed for continuation of the interim relief. However, it is to be noted that as regular court is not available, this court is in-charge of the matter for today only.

 avk                                                                         1/2




::: Uploaded on - 18/08/2017                     ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2018 16:04:24 :::
                                                                 501-WP-4125-2016.doc


 2                It is seen that interim oder is holding the field since 2nd 

December 2016. The learned advocate appearing for the respondent is contending that the petitioner is taking undue advantage of the interim order by making encroachment on other property. This will have to be determined on hearing the petition. Today, the matter is before this court only for extension of the interim order.

3 The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petition may be kept after Ganesh Festival. As the petitioner is enjoying the interim order, such request cannot be acceded, particularly when the learned advocate for the respondent against whom the interim order is operating, is opposing long adjournment.

4 Hence, stand over to 21st August 2017.

Interim order to continue till then.



                                                 (A. M. BADAR, J.)



 avk                                                                        2/2




::: Uploaded on - 18/08/2017                    ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2018 16:04:24 :::