Bombay High Court
Bhagvan Parshuram Go Seva Trust vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps ... on 1 April, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:3394
1 20B-wp-88-89-90-25j.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NOS. 88/2025, 89/2025 & 90/2025
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 88 OF 2025
Bhagvan Parshuram Go Seva Trust
Having address at Nandgaon Peth,
Tal. Dist. Amravati
Through its authorized representative
Samiksh Lokhande, Age 26 years,
R/o. Nandgaon Peth, Tal. Dist. Amravati
Maharashtra. . . . PETITIONER
// V E R S U S //
1. The State of Maharashtra Through-
Police Station Officer, Morshi Police
Station, Amravati.
2. Shaikh Zakir Shaikh Biram,
Age:- 50 years, Occu:- Agriculture
R/o. Ner Pinglayi, Tal: Morshi,
Dist: Amravati. . . . RESPONDENTS
WITH
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 89 OF 2025
Bhagvan Parshuram Go Seva Trust
Having address at- Nandgaon Peth,
Tal. And Dist. Amravati
Through its authorized representative-
Samiksh Lokhande, Age 2 years,
Occ. Law Aspirant. . . . PETITIONER
// V E R S U S //
1. The State of Maharashtra, Through-
Police Station Officer, Morshi, Police
Station, Amravati.
2 20B-wp-88-89-90-25j.odt
2. Sakir Ahmed Nasir Ahmed
(Accused/Applicant)
Aged 26 yrs, Occu:- Agriculture,
R/o. Ner Pinglayi, Tal: Morshi,
Dist: Amravati, Maharashtra. . . . RESPONDENTS
AND
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 90 OF 2025
Bhagvan Parshuram Go Seva Trust
Having Address at Nandgaon Peth,
Tal. Dist. Amravati
Through its authorized trustee-
Samiksh Lokhande, Age 26 years,
Occ.: Law Aspirant. . . . PETITIONER
// V E R S U S //
1. The State of Maharashtra, Through-
Police Station Officer, Morshi Police
Station, Amravati.
2. Suresh Yeshwant Singare,
alleged Owner of 6 bullocks
Age:- 48 yrs, Occu:- Agriculture
R/o. Yerala, Tal: Morshi, Dist: Amravati. . . . RESPONDENTS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Harish Pandya a/w. Shri Raju Gupta, Advocate for petitioner (in
all the petitions)
Ms. S. N. Thakur, APP for respondent no. 1/State (in all the petitions).
Shri S. Zia Qazi, Advocate for respondent no. 2 (in all the petitions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM :- M. W. CHANDWANI, J.
DATED :- 01.04.2025
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
Heard.
3 20B-wp-88-89-90-25j.odt
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for respondent no. 1/State as well as the learned counsel for respondent no. 2 on merits.
3. The substantive prayer in these Writ Petitions is for quashing the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Morshi (for short, "JMFC") releasing the animals seized in Crime Nos. 640/2024 and 641/2024 on 'Supratnama' bond with certain conditions which are also prayed by the petitioners in these Writ Petitions in Revision Applications filed by the petitioners before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Warud (for short, "ASJ"). The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned ASJ without considering the stay applications has issued notices on the Revision Applications and the stay applications are pending before him. Therefore, the learned ASJ be at least directed to dispose of those stay applications after hearing the petitioner and the respondents.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 vehemently, submitted that inspite of pendency of Revision applications, the present Writ Petitions have been filed for the same relief and therefore, the present Writ Petitions are not maintainable and are required to be dismissed.
4 20B-wp-88-89-90-25j.odt
5. Without going into the matrix of the case in detail, let me state that the petitioners approached this Court pending the Revision Applications before the learned ASJ against the order of the learned JMFC granting interim custody of the animals to respondent no. 2 by way of present Writ Petitions against the same order of granting interim custody of the animals to their respective owners. I am of the view that pending the Revision Applications, Writ Petitions for the same relief cannot be entertained and hence, they are disposed of accordingly.
6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the stay applications have not been considered by the learned ASJ which are pending before him. I feel it appropriate to direct the learned ASJ to consider those stay applications as early as possible, preferably within two weeks from the receipt of this order.
7. Since, the order of the learned JMFC has been stayed by this Court till date, the said stay order will remain in force for a further period of two weeks from today so that the learned ASJ can dispose of the stay applications pending before him.
8. It is made clear that the learned ASJ shall not get influenced by the observations made by this Court or by the order of 5 20B-wp-88-89-90-25j.odt stay granted by this Court and shall decide the stay applications as well the Revisions on its own merits.
9. In the above said terms, the Writ Petitions are disposed of.
10. Authenticated copy of this order be supplied to the parties.
(M. W. CHANDWANI, J.) RR Jaiswal Signed by: Mr. Rajnesh Jaiswal Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 03/04/2025 14:06:42