Dismissed¶28

Jawaharlal Sharma v. Union of India through the Ministry of Home

Bombay HC23 Apr 2025PIL/18/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compensation fund for acquitted prisoners; Arrest Insurance Scheme; Support to Poor Prisoners Scheme; PIL dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach Supreme Court under Article 32 Constitution of India; Jawaharlal Sharma v. Union of India; Bombay High Court Public Interest Litigation No. 18 of 2025; Amicus Curiae Dr. Milind Sathe; Alok Aradhe CJ; M.S. Karnik J; decision dated 23-04-2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to file a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Supreme Court. ¶28

Jawaharlal Sharma vs Union of India through the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

28.pil-18-25.odt

¶2

Digitally signed URMILA by URMILAPRAMOD PRAMOD INGALE INGALE Date:2025.04.24 11:45:04 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 18 OF 2025

¶5

Jawaharlal Sharma … Petitioner Versus Union of India and ors. .… Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr.Manoj Shirsat, Mr.Filji Frederick, Mr.Aayu Saxena, Ms.Hritika Shroff i/b FF & Associates, for the Petitioner.

¶8

Mr.Anil C. Singh, ASG a/w Mr.Aadesh Vyas, Ms.Sangeeta Yadav, Ms.Ruchita Verma, for the Respondent No.1.

¶9

Dr.Birendra Saraf (AG) a/w Ms.Vaishali Choudhary (Addl. GP), Smt.Varsha Sawant (AGP), for State- Respondent No.3.

¶10

Senior Advocate-Dr.Milind Sathe, Amicus Curiae a/w Mr. Aditya Mhase and Mr.Gaurav Srivastav.

¶11

¶12

CORAM : ALOK ARADHE, CJ & M.S.KARNIK, J.

¶13

DATE : 23^rd APRIL, 2025

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

In this PIL petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the

¶16

following reliefs:

¶17

“a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct Respondent No. 1 and/or Respondent No. 3 to create a fund to compensate the prisoners subjected to incarceration where the prosecution fails to prove the charge;

¶18

b) In the alternative to prayer clause [b] above, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct Respondent No. 1 and 2 to formulate and implement an Arrest Insurance Scheme for every arrest made to provide compensation to those prisoners against whom the

Ingale

28.pil-18-25.odt

prosecution fails to prove the charge;

¶23

c) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 3 to take steps for effective implementation of the Support to Poor Prisoners Scheme including creating awareness about it through social campaigns, advertisements etc.

¶24

d) Any other relief this court deems fit.”

¶25

This Court by an order dated 16/04/2025 had requested

¶26

Dr.Milind Sathe, learned Senior Counsel to assist this Court as Amicus. Learned Amicus has addressed us and has given a written note of submissions. After learned Amicus concluded his submissions, Mr. Shirsat who had filed the writ petition seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Supreme Court.

¶27

Before parting, we place on record our appreciation for the able assistance offered by Dr. Milind Sathe.

¶28

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

¶29

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶30

¶31

Ingale

Jawaharlal Sharma v. Union of India through the Ministry of Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jawaharlal Sharma v. Union of India through the Ministry of Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ku. Mangala Jairam Wakode and Another Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Urban Development Dept., Mumbai and Others

Aaliya Inamul Haque vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Education Minister, Mumbai and Another

A1-QURAISH Human Welfare Association and 2 Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Faiyyaz Mullaji vs the Brihanmumbai Mahanagar Palika

Akshay Subhash Tivramkar vs the Collector Thane and Ors.

Sharmila W/O Sandesh Ghuge vs University of Mumbai through Registrar

Chandrakant C Shah vs Securities and Exchange Board of India

Prashant Shankar Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Chief Secretary and Ors.

A1-QURAISH Human Welfare Association and 2 Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

M/S. Poonam Construction through Authorised Person M.G. Gaikwad vs the State of Maharashtra through PWD and Ors.

Ganesh Enterprises through Its Authorized Person Shri Pawan Subhash Agrawal vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary

Kamlakar Bhagoji Phatkare vs Peter Joseph Gonsalves and Ors.

Al Quraish Human Welfare Association vs the State of Maharashtra through Government Pleader

Sunil a Furtado vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (Mhada)