← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/3347/2025disposed off

Devyani Ishwardas Mehta And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra And ORS

2025-07-01Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge , Hon'Ble Shri Justice M. M. Sathaye2 pages

1/2 904-WP-3347-2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3347 OF 2025 Devyani Ishwardas Mehta And Ors

...Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

...Respondents

**** Mr. Abhinandan Vagyani i/b Mr. Sumit Shinde for the Petitioners. Mr. Avinash Naik, APP for Respondent/State.

Mr. H.S. Gavali, PI attached to Kandivali (W) Police Station. **** SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN by SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Date: 2025.07.01 18:59:02 +0530 CORAM :

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.

DATE :

1st JULY, 2025 P.C. :

1.

This matter was heard to a considerable length yesterday and again today. We would not entertain this petition to the extent of the dispute of the Petitioners who are a part of the minority group of society members, as against the decision taken by the society with the vote of the majority. This petition is being entertained only to the extent of Petitioner Nos.1 and 16 having been allegedly beaten up by purported bouncers of the majority members, as is voiced in the complaint dated 11.01.2025.

2.

The learned APP submits on instructions from the P.I. of Sneha Chavan

2/2 904-WP-3347-2025.odt Kandivali (West) Police Station-Respondent No.4 herein, that an Officer from the police station would reach out to Petitioner Nos. 1 and 16 on Thursday i.e. 03.07.2025, in between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m., by visiting their residences as per the address mentioned in the title clause of the petition. Their statements would be recorded and the procedure laid down in law would be followed. The learned APP further submits that Respondent No.5 Shri. Soham Kadam, will not be associated with the complaint of the Petitioners dated 11.01.2025 and the investigation as is directed by this Court.

3.

In view of the above, this Petition is disposed off. 4.

We make it clear that the dispute between the minority members qua the majority members, has not been considered by this Court and we have not expressed any opinion as regards the same. (M.M. SATHAYE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) Sneha Chavan