Disposed

Mohd Ali Mohd Habib Shaikh C-4654 v. Sandeep Kamble and Another

Bombay HC14 Mar 2018CP/142/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contempt petition was filed regarding non-compliance with an earlier order directing authorities to decide the petitioner's case within ten weeks. The court accepted the explanation of unintentional delay and the unconditional apology by the authorities, holding that the earlier order was complied with in letter and spirit.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition disposed of on the submission that the earlier order was complied in letter and spirit.

Mohd Ali Mohd Habib Shaikh C-4654 Vs Sandeep Kamble and… — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

(Order) (1) Contempt Petition No. 0142 of 2018

¶2

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

¶3

Contempt Petition No. 0142 of 2018

¶4

(In Criminal Writ Petition No. 01213 of 2017)

¶5

District : Aurangabad

¶6

Mohd. Ali s/o. Mohd. Habib
Shaikh (C-4654),
Open Prison, Paithan. .. Petitioner.

¶7

versus

¶8

1. Sandeep Kamble, Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

¶9

2. Sachin Ramesh Salave, Superintendent, Open Prison, Paithan. .. Respondents.

¶10

...........

¶11

Mr. Rupesh A. Jaiswal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. K.S. Patil, Addl. Public Prosecutor, for the respondents.

¶13

...........

¶14

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE &

¶15

 SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ.

¶16

 DATE : 14TH MARCH 2018

¶17

ORAL ORDER :

¶18

01.The grievance of the petitioner was, inspite
of directions of this Court in criminal writ petition
no. 01213 of 2017, thereby directing the authorities
to consider the case of the petitioner afresh, take
decision as expeditiously as possible and within

¶19

(Order) (2) Contempt Petition No. 0142 of 2018

¶20

stipulated time frame of ten weeks, the authorities
failed to comply the order within the stipulated time
frame.

¶21

02.Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has placed
on record, communication dated 01.02.2018. It is
submitted that in compliance of the order of this
Court, the petitioner is granted the benefit of State
remissions as per notification dated 28.04.1999.

¶22

03.Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor orally
submits that though there is some delay, the delay is
purely unintentional and for certain administrative
and procedural formalities. Learned Addl. Public
Prosecutor further submits that the authorities
tendered unconditional apology for the delay.

¶23

04.We accept the statement of the learned Addl.
Public Prosecutor and as the order passed by this
Court is complied in letter and spirit, we dispose of
the contempt petition.

¶24

( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi ) ( Prasanna B. Varale )
JUDGE JUDGE

¶25

...........

¶26

puranik / CP142.18

Mohd Ali Mohd Habib Shaikh C-4654 v. Sandeep Kamble and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Ali Mohd Habib Shaikh C-4654 v. Sandeep Kamble and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Mustakin Shaikh Tukadu and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shaikh Arif Shaikh Maheboob and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Akash Pandurang Jahire (C-9605) Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dattatraya Tulshiram Phirange (C-9797) Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vijaykumar Shrirang Jadhav (C-31) Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Supriya Chandrakant Bansode Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others