Amit Babasaheb Kalyani v. The State Of Maharashtra

19 Revn 318-25 .doc Ashish by ASHISH SAHEBRAO MHASKE Date: 2025.10.10 17:55:47 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ASHISH SAHEBRAO MHASKE CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 318 OF 2025 Amit Babasaheb Kalyani ... Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and ors ... Respondents Mr. Aabad Ponda, Sr. Advocate, a/w Mr. Amey M, Mr. Akhilesh S, Ms. Ujwala, Mr. Rahul Garg, Mr. Dhruv Balan, Mr. Parimal K i/b Khaitan & Co, for the applicant.

Mr. Sujay Gangal a/w Mr. Swaraj Savant, Mr. Harshal M, Mr. Varun Thanawala for respondent no.3.

Ms. Meenakshi Pahuja i/b ANB Legal for the respondent no.2.

Mrs. Rajashree Newton, APP for State - respondent no.1.

Ms. Sunita Rathod, PSI, Mundwa Police station, Pune.

CORAM

: AMIT BORKAR, J.

DATED : OCTOBER 8, 2025 P.C.:

1.

Challenge in this revision application is to the orders dated 15 July 2025, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khed - Rajgurunagar, Pune, in Criminal Revision Application Nos. 7 and 8 of 2024, arising out of First Information Report No. 800 of 2017 registered with Chakan Police Station, Pune Rural, for an alleged offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

19 Revn 318-25 .doc 2.

The primary grievance raised on behalf of the applicant is that the impugned order is passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the applicant.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents on instructions concede to this legal position. Hence, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (c).

4.

Considering the facts of the case, the Revisional Authority shall grant opportunity of hearing to all parties and shall decide the revision application within a period of three months from the date of appearance of the parties.

5.

Parties through their Advocate shall appear before the Sessions Court on 10 November 2025.

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)