Pundlik @ Gulab S/O Mahadeorao ... vs Registrar/Secretary, Gram ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 5924 Bom

                                                                                       
         Cri.W.P. No.388/16                             1




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

                              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.388 OF 2016




                                                              
         Petitioner               :      Shri Pundlik @ Gulab s/o Mahadeorao Uike,
                                         Aged about 56 years, Occupation : Service,
                                         R/o Ward No.3, Hanumangarh, Giri Peth,




                                                  
                                         Pipri (Meghe), Wardha, 
                                         Tahsil and District Wardha.
                                    ig   -- Versus --

         Respondent               :    1] Registrar/Secretary,
                                  
                                          Gram Panchayat, Ridhora, Tahsil Seloo, 
                                          District Wardha.

                                       2]  The Managing Director, 
         

                                           Sant Rohidas Charmodyog & 
                                           Charmakar Vikas Mahamandal Ltd.,
      



                                           (Govt. Undertaking), Bombay Life, 
                                           Building, 5th Floor, 45 Bit Nariman Road, 
                                           Mumbai: 01
    Respondent Nos.2 and 3
     deleted as per order
                                       3] Sant Rohidas Charmadyog & 





       dated 29/07/2016.
                                          Charmakar Vikas Mahamandal Ltd., 
                                          Samajik Nyaya Bhawan, Shewagram Road, Wardha,
                                          through its District Manager.               

                                     2A] The Collector, 





                                         Collector's Office, Wardha.

                         =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                         Shri A.C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for the Petitioner.
                           Shri T.A. Mirza, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.2.
                         =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

                                   C ORAM :  S. B. SHUKRE, J.

                                  DATE     :  10
                                                    OCTOBER, 2016.
                                                 th





                                                                                    





                                                           
    ORAL JUDGMENT :- 

                    Heard.  Rule.  Rule made returnable forthwith.




                                                          
    02]             Heard finally by consent.




                                             
    03]             The reply filed by the prosecution is taken on record.  It is seen
                              

from the impugned order dated 12 th May, 2016 passed by the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Seloo in Other Miscellaneous Criminal Application

No.8/2016 that the learned Magistrate has rejected the application filed

under Section 13(3) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act, 1969 by

reasoning that school leaving certificate is, prima facie, the best evidence of

date of birth in the absence of birth certificate. The learned Magistrate has,

however, completely ignored extract of entry regarding date of birth of the

applicant certified as true copy on behalf of the Collector's Office, Wardha.

This date of birth entry in the birth register of the Collector's Office, Wardha

discloses that the date of birth of the applicant is 27/02/1960. The learned

Magistrate has not given any reason as to why the certified copy of the extract

of death of birth entry be discarded. The learned Magistrate ought to have

considered the same and given reasons for discarding this date of birth entry.

The impugned order, therefore, cannot be sustained in law. The matter

deserves to be remanded back to the learned Magistrate for deciding it afresh

in accordance with law. Hence, the order.

i. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed.

ii. The impugned order is hereby quashed and set aside.

iii. The learned Magistrate is directed to decide the application

afresh in accordance with law.

iv. Leave is granted to the applicant to tender additional evidence, if

any, including of the applicant.

v. The learned Magistrate shall endeavour to dispose of the

application as expeditiously as possible and in any case on or

before 30th November, 2016.

vi. Rule is made absolute in above terms.

JUDGE *sdw

C E R T I F I C A T E

I certify that this judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy of the original signed judgment.

Uploaded by: S.D. Waghmare Uploaded on : 13/10/2016 P.A. to the Hon'ble Judge.