Disposed¶6

Sanjay Santosh Kalra v. Paras Kamubhai Shekhaliya

Bombay HC4 May 2026WP/347/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench; Criminal Writ Petition 347/2026; Sanjay Kalra v. Paras Shekhaliya; direction to Trial Court to call R and P (record and proceedings) immediately and decide case within one week; missing documents from R and P not filed with revision petition; application for certified copies; issue of maintainability and merits; notice to respondent No.1 dispensed with (no prejudice); APP A. Mate for respondent No.2; advocate G. D. Dani for petitioner; decided 04/05/2026; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to call the R and P entertained; Trial Court directed to call the R and P immediately and decide the case within one week; petition disposed of in those terms. ¶6

Sanjay Santosh Kalra vs Paras Kamubhai Shekhaliya — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 11 wp 347.26

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶3

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 347/2026

¶4

(Sanjay S/o Santosh Kalra Vs. Paras S/o Kanubhai Shekhaliya & anr.)

¶5

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶6

- - - - Mr. G. D. Dani, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. A. Mate, APP for respondent No.2.

¶7

CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J .

¶8

DATED : 04/05/2026.

¶9

Heard.

¶10

The order which this Court is passing today will

¶11

cause no prejudice to the respondents, therefore in my opinion, it is not necessary to issue notice to respondent No.1.

¶12

The State is represented through APP. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the impugned order.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without calling R and P the matter cannot be decided as some of the documents from the R and P. have not been filed along with the revision petition. He further submits that those documents are necessary to decide the case and

¶14

2 11 wp 347.26

¶15

he has applied for getting the certified copies of the same as the Court below is not ready to call the R and P. Without there being documents on record, it would be very difficult to work out the matter on merits, therefore the learned counsel submits that if the R and P is called, the petitioner is ready to argue on the issue of maintainability as well as on merits.

¶16

In my opinion, a reasonable request is being made and therefore, prayer to the extent of calling R and P can be entertained. Therefore, the Trial Court shall call R and P immediately and decide the case within one week.

¶17

The petition stands disposed of in above terms.

¶18

( M. M. NERLIKAR, J.)

¶19

Gohane

¶20

Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 04/05/2026 18:08:49

Sanjay Santosh Kalra v. Paras Kamubhai Shekhaliya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Santosh Kalra v. Paras Kamubhai Shekhaliya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samadhan Uttam Joshi vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. D.G.P., Buldhana, for Pso, Amdapur, Tq. Chikhali, Dist. Buldhana

Shriram Gulabrao Khond and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Shegaon City Ps , Tq. Shegaon Dist. Buldhana

Roza Pramod Ramteke ( in Jail) vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Aheri, Tq. Aheri Dist. Gadchiroli

Farzana Urf Anjum Ansar Qureshi vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Ps Kalmana

Jatin S/O Jagmohandas Doshi vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Barshitakli, Dist. Akola

Suraj S/O Arvind Thakre vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Investigation Officer, Kuhi Ps Dist. Nagpur