Rajesh S/O Birendra Pathak vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 4261 Bom

     cwp580.15.odt                                                                                                                  1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                                                                      
                   CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 580 OF 2015




                                                                                     
                Rajesh Birendra Pathak
                aged about 39 yrs., Occp. Service,
                r/o Sasti Open Cast Mine,




                                                                                    
                Ballarpur Area, WCL, Chandrapur,
                Distt. Chandrapur.          ::                                                     PETITIONER

                         .. Versus
                                   ..




                                                                
                Central Bureau of Investigation,
                                     
                through Superintendent of Police
                (CBI)/ACB, Civil Lines,
                Nagpur.                     ::                                                RESPONDENT
                                    
     ...................................................................................................................................
                               Shri R. M. Patwardhan, Advocate for the petitioner.
                           Shri Shyam Ahirkar, Special Counsel for the respondent.
      ...................................................................................................................................
      


                                                                   CORAM :  S. B. SHUKRE, J.

DATED : 28th JULY, 2016

O R A L J U D G M E N T O R A L J U D G M E N T

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent.

3. There is no dispute about the fact that the case of the

petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court

in Criminal Revision Application No. 126 of 2014 (Bibhas Chandra

Singh Vs. State of Maharashtra) dated 24/12/2014. The allegations

made against this applicant are similar to the allegations made against

the applicant in Criminal Revision Application No. 126 of 2014. In

fact, this petitioner is also similarly situated to the petitioners in

Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 44, 45, 46, 47 and 51 of 2015 all of whom

have been discharged from Special Case No. 5/2011. The petitioner,

therefore, cannot be discriminated against and deserves to be given

the benefit of parity.

4. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed and discharge

application stands allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner is discharged

from Special Case No. 4/2011.

The impugned order is hereby quashed and set aside.

Rule is made absolute in these terms.

JUDGE

wwl

CERTIFICATE

"I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct

copy of original signed Judgment."

Uploaded by : W.W. Lichade, P.A.

Uploaded on :02/8/2016