1. Shri Prabhakar Nimba Kothawade ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2016 Latest Caselaw 7240 Bom

                                     (1)       Cri. W.P. No. 308 of 2016




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                   AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.




                                                                      
                    Criminal Writ Petition No. 308 of 2016




                                              
                                                 District : Jalgaon
                              
    1. Shri Prabhakar s/o. Nimba Kothawade,
       Age : 52 years,




                                             
       Occupation : Business.

    2. Shri Yadhav s/o. Khandu Satode,
       Age : 48 years,
       Occupation : Business.




                                     
    3. Shri Prakash s/o. Namdeo Wani,
                               
       Age : 45 years,
       Occupation : Business.
                              
    4. Dr. Bhanudas s/o. Madhavrao Patil,
       Age : 43 years,
       Occupation : Doctor.

    5. Shri Pundalik s/o. Rama Patil,
      

       Age : 44 years,
       Occupation : Business.
   



    6. Sow. Jijabai w/o. Prabhakar Sisode,
       Age : 48 years,
       Occupation : Household.





    7. Shri Vilas s/o. Eknath Wani,
       Age : 59 years,
       Occupation : Business.

    8. Shri Bhatu s/o. Trimbak Wani,
       Age : 45 years,





       Occupation : Business. 

    9. Shri Ravindra s/o. Pandharinath Sonje,
       Age : 48 years,
       Occupation : Business.

    10. Shri Bhaskar s/o. Gopal Anna,
        Age : 42 years,
        Occupation : Business.

    11. Sow. Vaijanthabai w/o. Arjun Bhosale,




      ::: Uploaded on - 21/12/2016            ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2016 00:19:24 :::
                                        (2)           Cri. W.P. No. 308 of 2016


        Age : 44 years,
        Occupation : Household.




                                                                            
    12. Sow. Sundarbai w/o. Dayaram Bhosale,
        Age : 47 years,
        Occupation : Household. 




                                                    
    13. Shri Santosh s/o. Waman Marathe,
        Age : 48 years,
        Occupation : Business.




                                                   
    14. Shri Dattatraya s/o. Jagannath Wani,
        Age : 49 years,
        Occupation : Business.




                                        
    15. Shri Prakash Jagannath Wani,
        Age : 43 years,
        Occupation : Business. 
    16. Sow. Sindhubai w/o. Kashinath Wani,
        Age : 45 years,
                              
        Occupation : Household. 

    17. Shri Ramesh s/o. Gangadhar Shimpi,
        Age : 48 years,
        Occupation : Business.
      


    18. Sow. Shobhabai w/o. Vishwanath Wani,
   



        Age : 52 years,
        Occupation : Business.

        All R/o. Parola, 
        Taluka Parola,





        District Jalgaon.                              .. Petitioners.

              versus

    1. The State of Maharashtra,





       Through APP, High Court of Bombay,
       Bench at Aurangabad. 

    2. Shri Kushal s/o. Bajirao Patil,
       Age : -  ,
       Occupation : Labour,
       R/o. Motha Mahadeo Chowk,
       At Post Taluka Parola,
       District Jalgaon.                               .. Respondents.

                                     ............




      ::: Uploaded on - 21/12/2016                  ::: Downloaded on - 22/12/2016 00:19:24 :::
                                        (3)           Cri. W.P. No. 308 of 2016


          Mr. B.R. Warma, Advocate, for the petitioners.

          Mr. K.S. Hoke Patil, Addl. Public Prosecutor, for




                                                                            
          respondent no.01.

          Mr. Surendra V. Suryawanshi, Advocate, for 




                                                    
          respondent no.02. 

                                     ............




                                                   
                                     CORAM : Z.A. HAQ, J.

DATE : 15TH DECEMBER 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT :

Heard learned Advocates for the respective

parties.

02. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

03. The petitioners have challenged the order

passed by the Sessions Court by which the application

filed by them praying for condonation of delay in filing revision, is rejected for want of prosecution.

04. Though the respondent no.02 has opposed the prayer made in this petition and it is tried to point out that the present petitioners have not been

vigilant in prosecuting the matter throughout, in my view, considering the controversy and the facts of the case, specially that the order passed by the learned Magistrate directing issuance of process for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code is challenged by a co-accused in Criminal

(4) Cri. W.P. No. 308 of 2016

Writ Petition No. 01 of 2016 in which Rule is issued, in my view, the interests of justice would be

subserved by passing the following order :-

(a) The impugned order is set aside, however, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 1,000/- [Rupees one thousand] by each of the petitioners. The amount of

costs should be paid to the State of Maharashtra.

(b) The matter is remitted to the Court of Addl.

Sessions Judge, Amalner, for considering the

application filed by the present petitioners afresh.

(c) The petitioners, the respondent no.02 and the representative of respondent no.01 shall appear before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge on 20th

January, 2017.

(d) The amount of costs shall be deposited and receipt shall be produced on record before the

Sessions Court on the date of appearance, failing which this order shall stand recalled and the order which is challenged in this petition shall stand revived.

(e) The Writ Petition is disposed in the above terms.

( Z.A. HAQ ) JUDGE

..........

puranik / CRIWP308.16