Disposed¶22

Rahul Arjun Bhamre v. the State of Maharashtra through Collector Dhule and Others

Bombay HC9 Mar 2026WP/2178/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maharashtra Land Revenue Code; section 48 MLR Code penalty order; Section 256 MLR Code vehicle release during appeal; 25% deposit; Sub Divisional Officer Dhule; appellate authority; alternative remedy of appeal; writ petitions disposed; Rahul Arjun Bhamre; Himanshu Ashok Patil; Collector Dhule; State of Maharashtra; S. G. Chapalgaonkar; Aurangabad bench; 2026:BHC-AUG:10629.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner/s to approach the Appellate Authority; release of the petitioner's vehicle upon deposit of 25% of the amount as directed under the impugned order, on furnishing the usual undertaking or subject to other suitable conditions imposed by the appellate authority. ¶22

Rahul Arjun Bhamre vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector Dhule and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners' exception to the penalty order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Dhule should be pursued through the available statutory appellate remedy rather than writ jurisdiction. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

The writ petitions stand disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner/s to approach the Appellate Authority.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

On the petitioner depositing 25% of the amount as directed under the impugned order passed by the S.D.O., the petitioner's vehicle is to be released on furnishing the usual undertaking or subject to other suitable conditions found necessary by the appellate authority.

¶21

Key takeaways

Section 256 of the M.L.R. Code provides for release of the vehicle during pendency of appeal if the vehicle owner deposits 25% of the amount as directed under the notice.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (S. G. Chapalgaonkar, J.; March 09, 2026): Writ Petition Nos. 2178 and 2180 of 2026 (Rahul Arjun Bhamre and Himanshu Ashok Patil v. State of Maharashtra through Collector Dhule and others), challenging penalty orders dated 28.01.2026 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Dhule under section 48 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, were disposed of, learned counsel for the petitioners conceding the availability of the statutory appellate remedy. Relying on Section 256 of the M.L.R. Code, the Court directed that if the petitioner deposits 25% of the amount as directed under the impugned order, the petitioner's vehicle be released during pendency of appeal on furnishing the usual undertaking or subject to other suitable conditions found necessary by the appellate authority.

Rahul Arjun Bhamre v. the State of Maharashtra through Collector Dhule and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Arjun Bhamre v. the State of Maharashtra through Collector Dhule and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vitthal Rambhau Andhale vs Ushatai Mahadev Garje

Nazira Begum Kadir Pasha Jahagirdar through Lrs Akhtar Begum Aslam Jahagirdar Patel and Another vs Karimoddin Ajimoddin Jahagirdar Died Thr Lrs Ajimoddin Karimoddin Kavijang Died and Other

Prashant Damodhar Thorat and Others vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Imran Khalil Shah vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Shriganesh Alias Vinod Uttareshwar Warad vs Vijaya Alias Annapurna Gururaj Thote and Others

Dadasaheb Santaram Borude vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others