← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/4034/2025disposed off

Prabhakar Kumar Sahu v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

2025-09-12Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.S. Gadkari , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil2 pages

4-wp-4034-25 Gokhale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4034 OF 2025 Prabhakar Kumar Sahu ..Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

..Respondents __________ Mr. Satish Shukla for Petitioner.

Ms. Sangita Phad, APP for State/Respondent No.1. Mr. Aditya Gole i/b. Ketki Gokhale for Respondent No.2. __________ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.

DATE : 12 SEPTEMBER 2025 PC :

1.

This writ petition is placed for showing the compliance of the order dated 12.08.2025. Vide that order, a Division Bench of this Court had directed the Petitioner to pay Rs.75000/- to the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund. The office note shows that, compliance of this condition is made and the amount of Rs.75000/- is paid to that fund. Therefore, the order dated 12.08.2025 stands complied with.

Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date:

2025.09.15 11:19:28 +0530 2.

However, the learned counsel for the Petitioner VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE

4-wp-4034-25 submitted that, in the prayer clause of the petition, inadvertently, Sessions Case No.651 of 2025 before the Sessions Court at Mumbai is mentioned. The correct number is Sessions Case No.691 of 2025. Since the said number is mentioned in the prayer clause, it is reflected in the order dated 12.08.2025. According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner, it is a typographical error in his prayer clause which needs to be corrected, so that, the order dated 12.08.2025 can be suitably amended. He seeks permission to take appropriate steps in that behalf by approaching the Registry and making a request to place the matter before the same Bench that had passed the order dated 12.08.2025.

3.

Learned APP confirms that the correct sessions case number is Sessions Case No.691 of 2025.

4.

Therefore, in this situation, in the interest of justice, permission as sought by the learned counsel for the Petitioner is granted.

(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)