← Library
Bombay High CourtCP/492/2015admittedallowedgrantedrule absolute

Shashikant Bhurya Kokani v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Dept. Of Home Affairs Mantrayal And Others

2015-11-24Hon'Ble Shri Justice S V Gangapurwala,Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.K. Jadhav2 pages

1 CP492.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 492 OF 2015 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1560 OF 2014 Shashikant Bhurya Kokani .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Others .. Respondents Shri D. P. Palodkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri S. G. Karlekar, A. P. P. for the respondent No. 3. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND V. K. JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : 24TH NOVEMBER, 2015.

PER COURT :- 1.

Vide the present contempt petition the petitioner alleges contempt of the order passed by this Court dated 27th March, 2015, in Criminal Writ Petition No. 1560 of 2014, whereby this Court had made Rule absolute in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C'. The writ petition was dismissed with regard to prayer clause 'D' wherein the petitioner claimed police protection. The same prayer was specifically refused by this Court. In a representation dated 23.11.2014 which is in the nature of complaint, this Court had directed the Authorities to take appropriate steps in this regard. Affidavit in reply is filed, wherein the respondents have

2 CP492.15 clarified that, pursuant to the said representation F. I. R. is registered and chargesheet is also filed against the accused persons. According to the petitioner, in the representation dated 23.11.2014, request was made for police protection. 2.

The said complaint was basically to register offence against the accused persons. The same has been done by the Authorities. In the said representation only a passing reference was made of police protection. This Court has specifically refused the said prayer.

3.

Considering the above, the Authorities have complied the orders of this Court. Contempt stands purged. 4.

As far as, police protection is concerned the petitioner may make a fresh application, which would be considered and decided by the respondents / Authorities on its own merits expeditiously and preferably within two (2) months on receipt of representation.

[ V. K. JADHAV, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] sam/Nov. 15