Petitioner sought writ directions to produce the respondent in jail for executing a sale deed. The High Court upheld the trial court's refusal, noting the pending criminal prosecution and risk of prejudicing depositors' rights.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
905criwp404 of 2020-j
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.404 OF 2020
Ganesh s/o Bhaguji Kanawade, Age; 38 years, Occ; Agril, R/o; Near Gujar Market, Akole, Tq. Akole, District Ahmednagar. ...Petitioner
VERSUS
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Hemant U. Dhage APP for Respondent No. 1-State : Mrs. G.L.Deshpande
CORAM : SURENDRA P.TAVADE , J.
DATE : 2nd September, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
2 905criwp404 of 2020-j
respondent No. 2 before the Sub Registrar Office for execution of sale deed in his favour.
summarized as under :
Respondent No. 2 along with other persons were arrested by the Sangemnar City Police Station, Tq. Sangamner District Ahmednagar, in Crime No. 222 of 2017 for the offences punishable under Section 408, 418, 467, 468, 471, 477 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.
3 905criwp404 of 2020-j
to transfer his rights in the said property in favour of the petitioner and others but he is in jail, therefore the sale deed could not be executed. It is contended that respondent No. 2 is ready and willing to execute the sale deed if he is produced before the Sub Registrar’s Office. Therefore, the petitioner prays that he may be produced before the Sub Registrar Office for execution of document. Accordingly the petitioner had filed application before the trial Court but the trial Court rejected the said application on the ground that huge money of many depositors are involved in the crime registered against respondent No. 2. Similarly, there is possibility that respondent No. 2 might have acquired the suit property with the help of money collected from many depositors. The said order is impugned in this petition.
4
905criwp404 of 2020-j
APP for the respondent No. 1-State and perused the documents.
5
905criwp404 of 2020-j
opinion the order passed by the trial Court is correct and there is no
need to interfere with it. Hence I pass following order :
ORDER
( SURENDRA P.TAVADE ) JUDGE
mahajansb/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's rejection of the petition seeking execution of a sale deed during the pendency of criminal prosecution.
Ganesh s/o Bhaguji Kanawade
State of Maharashtra Through Police Inspector, Sangamner City Police Station
Sachin Bajrang Kawade
Surendra P. Tavade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
