Chandan S/O. Dilip Trivedi v. The State Of Mah. Thr. Its Secretary Home Dep. Mantralaya Mumbai And 6 Others

2025:BHC-NAG:13063-DB 907 Cri. WP-773-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.773 OF 2017 [Chandan S/o Dilip Trivedi ..vs.. The State of Maharashtra and others] __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.

Mr R. M. Daga, Advocate a/w Mr P. R. Agrawal, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr S. S. Doifode, Addl. P. P. for Respondents/State.

CORAM

: ANIL L. PANSARE AND RAJ D. WAKODE, J J.

DATE : 27 th NOVEMBER, 2025 .

1.

On 19th November, 2025, following order was passed : "On 19th April, 2018, following order was passed as could be seen:

"In response to the orders passed by this Court from time to time, it is reported to us that the collector, Yavatmal has granted renewal of armed licence to the petitioner as per the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner in appeal. Therefore, the reliefs in terms of prayer clause (i) to (iii) do not at all survive. So far as reliefs in terms of prayer clause (iv) to (vii) are concerned, rule made returnable early.

Shri Khan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 3."

2.

As per learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the substantive grievance put forth by the petitioner in the form of prayer clauses (i) to (iii) was resolved. What is/was left was the prayer of compensation and action against respondent No.3-Collector, Yavatmal.

3.

Considering the fact that corrective steps were taken by respondent No.3, we are, at such a belated stage, not inclined to pass any order in this regard.

4. As regards compensation, we intend to grant leave to the petitioner to approach appropriate Court and seek compensation.

907 Cri. WP-773-2017 5.

So far as (vi)th prayer is concerned, since the substantive prayer is met, to now direct respondent No.3 to furnish record of the valid license holders/persons who have been granted renewal of license under Arms Act, 1959, is something which will only burden the Court with additional record, without any fruitful reasons. The petitioner may obtain the documents for the purpose of seeking compensation and/or any other relief as may be necessary.

6.

At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner seeks time to take instructions.

7.

Time granted.

8.

List on 27/11/2025."

2.

As could be seen, the counsel for petitioner sought time to take instructions. The counsel, however, submits that the petitioner has not given any instruction. Thus, it appears that the petitioner for no valid reason wants to pursue cause. That being so, and considering the fact that the substantive prayer has been met, we dispose of the petition with liberty to seek compensation as mentioned in the order dated 19th November, 2025.

3.

We may clarify here that if, the petitioner seeks documents in terms of para 5, the same shall be provided to him by the respondent No.3.

(RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (ANIL L. PANSARE, J.) TAMBE