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
