Aam Admi Party And 3 ORS. v. The State Of Maharashtra And 20 ORS

1/2 19-nmw.463.2017 nsc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.463 OF 2017 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.23 OF 2014 M/s.K.S.Chamankar Enterprises ...Applicant

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

Aam Admi Party and Ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Maharashtra and Ors.

...Respondents

Mr.A.R.Shaikh for Applicant.

Ms.Geeta Shastri, A.G.P for the Respondent-State. Mr.S.K.Saxena for Respondent Nos.7, 8 and 17. Mr.Karan Vyas, for Respondent Nos.9, 10 and 15. Mr.Sudarshan Khawase (Naik) for Respondent Nos.12, 13 and 14. Mr.R.S.Apte, Senior Advocate i/b Mr.A.A.Garge, for Respondent No.18. CORAM : DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. & M. S. SONAK, J.

DATE : 17th NOVEMBER, 2017 P.C. :

1.

Notice of Motion No.463 of 2017 is filed seeking a copy of

2/2 19-nmw.463.2017 the ACB Report for initiating action against Respondent No.11 and others. Respondent No.11 seems to be one of the accused in the charge-sheet filed by the ACP. Once the applicant has a copy of the charge-sheet and annexed papers, if the report in question is not part of the charge-sheet, we fail to understand how they are entitled to such a copy. Now the report is filed responding to the allegations of inaction on the part of the respondentauthorities. In the Public Interest Litigation, since the charge-sheet is already filed, we fail to understand what else can be done at the instance of the State. In that view of the matter, the petitioners have to explain and this cannot become a platform for Respondent No.11 to seek documents which otherwise they are not entitled to.

2.

Accordingly, Notice of Motion No.463 of 2017 is dismissed. M. S. SONAK, J.

CHIEF JUSTICE