A summary of the important cases from the causelist of the Bombay High Court..LIST OF CASES.Bombay High Court.Janhit Manch & 2 Ors v. Hon’ble Minister for Information and BroadcastingNazir Noor Ali Jariya v. All India Muslim Personal Law Board & Ors.Rabia A Khan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.Vivek Vittal Mahamuni v. State of Maharashtra & AnrNityanand Harnarayan Mishra v. Honble Chief Minister & 9 Ors..1. Janhit Manch & 2 Ors v. Hon’ble Minister for Information and Broadcasting.[Item 15 Court 13- NMWST(OS)/397/2016].Bench: AS Oka, AA Sayed JJ.The petition seeks restoration and repair of caves in Mumbai city like the Jogeshwari Caves, Mahakali Caves etc. Encroachments around these caves are said to be in violation of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 and the rules of 1959..In the previous hearings, the BMC submitted that process of demolition of these encroachments has already begun..Today in court: The BMC failed to inform the court about any fresh developement in the demolition and rehabilitation process. An affidavit was filed which detailed handing over of 102 tenements to project affected persons in 3 different sites..The civic body has now been asked to file a fresh affidavit wherein all details about fresh encroachments and steps taken by the civic body to ensure protection of these caves will be given..2. Nazir Noor Ali Jariya v. All India Muslim Personal Law Board & Ors..[Item 19 Court 13- PIL(OS)/56/2014].Bench: AS Oka, AA Sayed JJ.The petitioners claim that matters relating to matrimonial dispute or other matters are only within the jurisdiction of civil courts or Family Courts. Relying upon the observations made by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Mohd. Zahir Khan Koti v. Masajid Committee, the petitioner says that the functioning of the Darul-Quza does not have any statutory support..Today in court: Despite an earlier order dated April 1, the state government did not take a position in the matter. Hence a show cause notice was issued to the Chief Secretary as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated. Notice is returnable on July 8..Acting AG Rohit Deo has been asked to appear in the matter..3. Rabia A Khan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors..[Item 2 Court 54- WP(Cri)/669/2016].Bench: Naresh H Patil, PD Naik JJ.Rabia Khan, mother of late actress Jiah Khan, has sought a stay on the trial against Sooraj Pancholi. She is dissatisfied with CBI’s investigation and seeks an SIT to be formed. In the previous hearing, Patil J had declined a further stay on the trial. After Khan moved to the apex court seeking the same, the Supreme Court refused to intervene but asked the High Court to rule on the petition expeditiously..Today in court: Petitioner’s counsel, Subhash Jha submitted that the petitioner had to travel abroad as her daughter is unwell hence the matter be adjourned. Although Patil J questioned the reasoning initially saying the apex court had ordered the matter to be decided expiditiously, he granted the request..Rabia’s lawyer was directed to file a rejoinder to CBI’s affidavit in the case..The matter will now be heard in two weeks..4. Vivek Vittal Mahamuni v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.[Item 22 Court 13- CRPIL/21/2015].Bench: AS Oka, AA Sayed JJ.The petitioner alleges that niether summons nor a warrant is being served to the accused with offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1882 in the State..The High Court Registry was previously directed to pull out necessary data in this regard available on the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG)..Today in court: The Registrar(Judicial II) filed an affidavit today with all the data available with NJDG. Around 45139 cases are pending for service of warrant..Public Prosecutor Sandeep Shinde sought time to take instructions in light of these figures..Oka J said:.“This is a serious issue, state must respond immediately. Considering these figures, the only option now seems to be creation of a separate cell at every police station for the purposes of issuing summons etc”..5. Nityanand Harnarayan Mishra v. Honble Chief Minister & 9 Ors..[Item 34 Court 13- PIL(OS)/21/2016].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ..A PIL alleging fraud, embezzelment and siphoning off the district planning and developement committee fund. The Chief Minister of Maharashtra is one of the respondents..Today in court: This matter could not be taken up due to paucity of time.
A summary of the important cases from the causelist of the Bombay High Court..LIST OF CASES.Bombay High Court.Janhit Manch & 2 Ors v. Hon’ble Minister for Information and BroadcastingNazir Noor Ali Jariya v. All India Muslim Personal Law Board & Ors.Rabia A Khan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.Vivek Vittal Mahamuni v. State of Maharashtra & AnrNityanand Harnarayan Mishra v. Honble Chief Minister & 9 Ors..1. Janhit Manch & 2 Ors v. Hon’ble Minister for Information and Broadcasting.[Item 15 Court 13- NMWST(OS)/397/2016].Bench: AS Oka, AA Sayed JJ.The petition seeks restoration and repair of caves in Mumbai city like the Jogeshwari Caves, Mahakali Caves etc. Encroachments around these caves are said to be in violation of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 and the rules of 1959..In the previous hearings, the BMC submitted that process of demolition of these encroachments has already begun..Today in court: The BMC failed to inform the court about any fresh developement in the demolition and rehabilitation process. An affidavit was filed which detailed handing over of 102 tenements to project affected persons in 3 different sites..The civic body has now been asked to file a fresh affidavit wherein all details about fresh encroachments and steps taken by the civic body to ensure protection of these caves will be given..2. Nazir Noor Ali Jariya v. All India Muslim Personal Law Board & Ors..[Item 19 Court 13- PIL(OS)/56/2014].Bench: AS Oka, AA Sayed JJ.The petitioners claim that matters relating to matrimonial dispute or other matters are only within the jurisdiction of civil courts or Family Courts. Relying upon the observations made by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Mohd. Zahir Khan Koti v. Masajid Committee, the petitioner says that the functioning of the Darul-Quza does not have any statutory support..Today in court: Despite an earlier order dated April 1, the state government did not take a position in the matter. Hence a show cause notice was issued to the Chief Secretary as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated. Notice is returnable on July 8..Acting AG Rohit Deo has been asked to appear in the matter..3. Rabia A Khan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors..[Item 2 Court 54- WP(Cri)/669/2016].Bench: Naresh H Patil, PD Naik JJ.Rabia Khan, mother of late actress Jiah Khan, has sought a stay on the trial against Sooraj Pancholi. She is dissatisfied with CBI’s investigation and seeks an SIT to be formed. In the previous hearing, Patil J had declined a further stay on the trial. After Khan moved to the apex court seeking the same, the Supreme Court refused to intervene but asked the High Court to rule on the petition expeditiously..Today in court: Petitioner’s counsel, Subhash Jha submitted that the petitioner had to travel abroad as her daughter is unwell hence the matter be adjourned. Although Patil J questioned the reasoning initially saying the apex court had ordered the matter to be decided expiditiously, he granted the request..Rabia’s lawyer was directed to file a rejoinder to CBI’s affidavit in the case..The matter will now be heard in two weeks..4. Vivek Vittal Mahamuni v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.[Item 22 Court 13- CRPIL/21/2015].Bench: AS Oka, AA Sayed JJ.The petitioner alleges that niether summons nor a warrant is being served to the accused with offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1882 in the State..The High Court Registry was previously directed to pull out necessary data in this regard available on the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG)..Today in court: The Registrar(Judicial II) filed an affidavit today with all the data available with NJDG. Around 45139 cases are pending for service of warrant..Public Prosecutor Sandeep Shinde sought time to take instructions in light of these figures..Oka J said:.“This is a serious issue, state must respond immediately. Considering these figures, the only option now seems to be creation of a separate cell at every police station for the purposes of issuing summons etc”..5. Nityanand Harnarayan Mishra v. Honble Chief Minister & 9 Ors..[Item 34 Court 13- PIL(OS)/21/2016].Bench: AS Oka, PD Naik JJ..A PIL alleging fraud, embezzelment and siphoning off the district planning and developement committee fund. The Chief Minister of Maharashtra is one of the respondents..Today in court: This matter could not be taken up due to paucity of time.
