Sagar S/O Arunrao Deshpande vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 7493 Bom

                                                                                          1                 Cr.W.P. 1621.2016 - [J]


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                                                                                            
                                 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1621 OF 2016




                                                                                                    
                                         Sagar s/o Arunrao Deshpande




                                                                                                   
                                         Age : 30 Yrs., Occ. : Business,
                                         R/o : Kabad Galli, Beed,
                                         Tq. & Dist. Beed.                             ...                   .... PETITIONER




                                                                              
                                                  ig                           VERSUS
                                                
                                          The State of Maharashtra

                                          Through Police Station,
        


                                          Beed (City), Dist. Beed.                                        ..... RESPONDENT
     



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

                                         Mr. S.J.Salunke, Advocate for Petitioner.





                                         Mr. A.R.Kale, A.P.P. for Respondent - State.
                                                              ..............................
                                                                                                    CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATE OF JUDGMENT :20th DECEMBER, 2016

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

ORAL JUDGMENT :

01. Heard Mr. S.J.Salunke, learned Advocate

for the petitioner and Mr. A.R.Kale, learned A.P.P.

2 Cr.W.P. 1621.2016 - [J]

for the Respondent - State.

02. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

03. The petitioner/accused has challenged the

Judgment passed by the Sessions Court dismissing

the Criminal Revision Application filed by the

petitioner and maintaining the order passed by the

learned Magistrate, by which the application filed by

the accused u/s 457 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure for releasing the property [Mobile Cell

Phone] is rejected.

04. In para No. 5 of the impugned Judgment,

the learned Additional Sessions Judge has recorded

that the Cell Phone in question is seized as instrument

of gaming u/s 6 of the Maharashtra Prevention of

Gambling Act, 1887.

05. Considering the facts of the case, I am not

inclined to interfere with the impugned Judgment and

Order. However, in my view, the interest of justice

3 Cr.W.P. 1621.2016 - [J]

would be sub-served by directing the learned

Magistrate to dispose of the proceedings before him

within four months.

06. The Criminal Writ Petition is disposed of in

the above terms.

07. In the circumstances, the parties to bear

their own costs.

[Z.A.HAQ, J.]

KNP/Cr.W.P. 1621.2016 - [J]