Raj Kiran Bahu Udeshiy Sanstha Through President Dharmaraj Dagdu Bhadange v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS.

1/2 902-WP-3244-2019.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3244 OF 2019 Raj-Kiran Bahu-Udyeshiy Sanstha Through its President .. Petitioner Vs.

1. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

.. Respondents Ms.Anushree Kurup i/b Ad. D.V.Sutar for petitioner. Mr.F.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent No.1-State. CORAM : RANJIT MORE & N.J. JAMADAR, JJ.

DATE : 18TH SEPTEMBER 2019 P.C.

1.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has moved for Speaking to the Minutes of the order dated 27th August 2019. 2.

On 27th August 2019, the matter was mentioned out of turn seeking production in view of urgency. When the matter was called out, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from his clients, sought leave to withdraw the petition and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. Today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the order dated 27th Augusts 2019, it is rightly recorded that the counsel for the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the petition and liberty was also sought for filing fresh petition as and when cause of action arises. However, the same is not mentioned in the order. Shraddha Talekar PS

2/2 902-WP-3244-2019.doc 3.

On 27th August, 2019, we granted leave with liberty as prayed for. However, in paragraph 2 of the said order, the same remained to be mentioned due to inadvertence. In view of this, paragraphs 2 and 3 of the order are corrected to read as under :

"2 Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, from his clients, seeks leave to withdraw the petition with liberty to file fresh petition as and when cause of action arises. Leave, as prayed for, is granted.

3.

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn."

4. The corrections be incorporated in the original order.

[ N.J. JAMADAR, J. ] [ RANJIT MORE, J.] Shraddha Talekar PS