Disposed
Sachin Pralhad Chavan v. State of Maha. Thr. Prin. Sec. and Anr.
Bombay HCPIL/103/2023
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
904-PIL-103-2023
Pdp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 103 OF 2023
Shri Sachin Pralhad Chavan .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
Mr. Tanaji Mhatugade for petitioner. Mr. P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader a/w Mr. M. M. Pabale, AGP & Smt. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for respondent no.1/State. Mr. Abhijit M. Adagule for respondent no.2.
CORAM: DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. & ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
DATE: 3rd NOVEMBER, 2023
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Mhatugade, learned counsel representing the petitioner, Mr. Kakade, learned Government Pleader, representing the respondent no.1/State and Mr. Adagule, learned counsel representing the respondent no.2.
2. The issue engaged in this PIL petition has already been decided by our order dated 4th October, 2023 passed in a bunch of writ petitions, leading writ petition being PIL No. 132 of 2022, Gopal Dagdu Lahange vs. State of Maharshtra & Ors .
3. The learned counsel for the parties does not dispute the same.
4. Accordingly, this PIL petition stands disposed of in terms of the said order dated 4th October, 2023.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
Digitally signed by PRAVIN PRAVIN DASHARATH DASHARATH PANDIT PANDIT Date: 2023.11.03 14:53:17 +0530
1
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gopal Dagdu Lahange vs. State of MaharashtraFollowed¶11
PIL No. 132 of 2022, Gopal Dagdu Lahange vs. State of Maharshtra & Ors
Shri Sachin Pralhad Chavan
The State of Maharashtra
Anonymous Respondent No.2
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA
ARIF S. DOCTOR
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court