{"id":132788,"date":"2009-03-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009"},"modified":"2018-10-07T16:45:18","modified_gmt":"2018-10-07T11:15:18","slug":"sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009<\/div>\n
Bench: A. H. Joshi, A. B. Chaudhari<\/div>\n
                                   1\n             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n                       NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR\n\n\n\n\n                                                                      \n             Criminal Writ Petition No. 330 of 2006\n\n\n\n\n                                              \n     Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing\n     Chavan,\n     aged about 51 years,\n     resident of Hingna Karegaon,\n     Tq. Khamgaon,\n\n\n\n\n                                             \n     Distt. Buldana.                           ....          Petitioner.\n\n                                Versus\n\n\n\n\n                                 \n     1.   State of Maharashtra,\n          through Chief Secretary,\n          Mantralaya,\n                   \n          Mumbai-400 032.\n\n     2.   State of Maharashtra,\n          through Secretary,\n                  \n          Department of Home,\n          Mantralaya,\n          Mumbai-400 032.\n\n     3.   Superintendent of Police,\n      \n\n          Buldana.\n\n     4.   Collector, Buldana.\n   \n\n\n\n     5.   Gokulchand Sananda,\n          resident of near Khamgaon Urban\n          Co-perative Bank,\n          Khamgaon, Distt.\n\n\n\n\n\n          Buldana.                      ....                 Respondents.\n\n                              *****\n     Mr. P.C. Madkholkar, Adv., for the petitioner.\n\n     Mr. Subodh Dharmadhikari, Senior Advocate, as Special\n\n\n\n\n\n     Public Prosecutor for respondent nos. 1 to 4.\n\n     Mr. C.S. Kaptan, Adv., for the respondent no.5.\n                              *****\n\n\n                                  CORAM   :     A.H.JOSHI AND\n                                                A.B. CHAUDHARI,JJ.\n<\/pre>\n
                            Reserved on:25thFebruary,2009.\n<\/p>\n
                                              ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                            2<\/span><\/p>\n
                                Pronounced on:            5th March, 2009.\n\n\n\n\n                                                                               \n     J U D G M E N T [Per A.H. Joshi, J]:\n\n\n\n\n                                                    \n     1.         Order-sheets      reveal        that      on     21st     September,\n\n<\/pre>\n
     2007, this Court had put the parties on notice that<\/p>\n
     this petition would be taken up for final hearing at<\/p>\n
     the stage of admission-hearing.\n<\/p>\n
                Notice of this petition was not issued to the<\/p>\n
     Respondent    No.5. ig The       Respondent         No.5      has,       however,<\/p>\n
     filed appearance voluntarily and also filed                          Affidavit-\n<\/p>\n
     in-Reply,     way     back       in       October,         2007.         He      has<\/p>\n
     participated in the hearing from time to time. In so<\/p>\n
     far   as    the     affidavits        of    other         respondents            are<\/p>\n
     concerned, those are on record.\n<\/p>\n
                Hence     Rule.        Respective            Advocates             waive<\/p>\n
     service,     and    Rule    is    taken      up      for      final        hearing<\/p>\n
     forthwith by consent.\n<\/p>\n
     2.         Heard learned Adv. Mr. P.C. Madkholkar for the<\/p>\n
     petitioner,        learned       Senior       Advocate               Mr.        S.P.\n<\/p>\n
     Dharmadhikari appearing as a Special Public Prosecutor<\/p>\n
     for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and learned Adv. Mr. C.S.\n<\/p>\n
     Kaptan for respondent no.5.\n<\/p>\n
     3.         Petitioner is praying for the reliefs in two<\/p>\n
     prayer clauses, however, they seem to be four reliefs<\/p>\n
                                                       ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                 3<\/span>
\n     in all, which are as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
             “A) [1]    …by writ in the nature of
\n                        mandamus or any other appropriate
\n                        writ the telephonic message at<\/p>\n
                        Annexure-E by the Secretary of
\n                        the Chief Minister be declared
\n                        illegal, null and void and it
\n                        amounts to abuse of due process
\n                        of law. ….\n<\/p>\n
                  [2]   ...the    letter\/order     of  the\n                        Collector    dated    5.6.2006  at\n<\/pre>\n
                        Annexure-C by which registration
\n                        of   crime    is   prohibited,  be
\n                        declared to be null and void and<\/p>\n
                        the same be quashed and set aside
\n                        saddling cost of Rs.1 Lakh each
\n                   ig   on the Collector as well as the
\n                        Government.”\n<\/p>\n
             “B) [1]    By appropriate writ, order or
\n                        direction direct the respondents<\/p>\n
                        no. 1 and 2 to reconstitute the
\n                        SIT constituted by Superintendent
\n                        of Police Shri Krushna Prakash
\n                        with the other officers, PI Ane,
\n                        PI Deorao Tiwase and PI P.K.<\/p>\n
                        Daberao   and   direct   them  to<\/p>\n
                        investigate    the    matter   in
\n                        accordance with law in regard to<\/p>\n
                        the complaints which are filed
\n                        against Mr. Gokulchand Sananda
\n                        vide Annexure-A and subsequent
\n                        complaints which are already gone
\n                        to the number 50. ….\n<\/p>\n
                  [2]   ….a further direction to issue
\n                        a   general   direction  to   all
\n                        concerned Ministers and Collector
\n                        and Commissioner not to interfere
\n                        in the matter and let the law
\n                        take its own course.”\n<\/p>\n
     [Prayers are divided and have been marked [1] and [2]
\n     for identification as well as emphasis while quoting].\n<\/p>\n
     [Quoted from page no. 8 of the Writ Petition paper-
\n     book].\n<\/p>\n
                                       ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                             4<\/span><\/p>\n
     4.         Facts, in brief, as narrated in the petition,<\/p>\n
     are as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
     [a]        Petitioner      seems       to     represent          the     cause       of<\/p>\n
     indebted       farmers   in     and    around         Khamgaon         Taluka        of<\/p>\n
     Buldana district, who are victims of usurious money<\/p>\n
     lending transactions by respondent no.5 and his family
\n     members or associates.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                         \n     [b]        Petitioner         has     filed     a      detailed          complaint\n\n     dated      23rd   May,\n                        ig      2006      which     is      Annexure-A            to    the\n\n<\/pre>\n
     petition, and demanded that the entire transactions by<\/p>\n
     members     of     family       of      the     respondent               no.5        be<\/p>\n
     investigated.\n<\/p>\n
     [c]        Petitioner      came       to    know      that      his      complaint<\/p>\n
     would not be investigated, as prohibitory directions<\/p>\n
     have    been    received      from     the    Hon’ble          Chief       Minister<\/p>\n
     which are communicated to the Superintendent of Police,<\/p>\n
     Buldana, through :-\n<\/p>\n
                (i)     a telephonic message from Mr. Padwal,
\n                        Personal Secretary to Hon’ble Chief
\n                        Minister, an entry in Station Diary
\n                        for this direction is taken; and;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                (ii) a letter issued under the signature
\n                     of   the  Collector,   Buldana, copy
\n                     whereof is at Annexure-C dated 6th
\n                     May, 2006 to the petition.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     5.         Through       this       letter     [Annex.C],              issued        by<\/p>\n
                                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                              5<\/span>
\n     Collector,       Buldana,       under       orders       of    Hon’ble          Chief<\/p>\n
     Minister,    the     Collector,         Buldana,         has     directed         the<\/p>\n
     Superintendent of Police not to take cognizance of any<\/p>\n
     complaint received against family members of Dilipkumar<\/p>\n
     Sananda,    unless       such    complaint          is    considered            by    a<\/p>\n
     District-level Committee appointed for controlling the<\/p>\n
     illegal money lending and without taking opinion of the
\n     District     Govt.    Pleader,          since      false       and      frivolous<\/p>\n
     complaints are being made against members of family of<\/p>\n
     Dilipkumar Sananda, the Member of Legislative Assembly.\n<\/p>\n
     6.         It is seen from various Farad orders passed in<\/p>\n
     present petition by this Court from time to time that,<\/p>\n
     this   Court       had    directed           that        the     progress            of<\/p>\n
     investigation of various complaints made by the farmers<\/p>\n
     against    the     family       members      and      associates           of     the<\/p>\n
     Respondent No.5 shall be reported from time to time,<\/p>\n
     and, therefore, various affidavits have been filed.\n<\/p>\n
     7.         The     affidavit       filed        by       Superintendent              of<\/p>\n
     Police, Buldana, on 23rd April, 2007 which is                            pages 66
\n     to 68 of paper-book accompanies a chart, wherein it is<\/p>\n
     shown that :-\n<\/p>\n
                [a]     in relation to seven complaints\/FIRs
\n                        registered against the members Sananda
\n                        family, charge-sheets are filed, and<\/p>\n
                [b]     various other complaints are disposed<\/p>\n
                                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                                6<\/span>
\n                           of either being matters of civil
\n                           nature or being withdrawn or settled,<\/p>\n
                           beyond    limitation,   being    non-<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                           cognizable etc.<\/p>\n
                It is then urged that the petition has become<\/p>\n
     infructuous and that no further orders are necessary.\n<\/p>\n
     8.         During        the     hearing,       learned          Adv.       for     the<\/p>\n
     petitioner Mr. P.C. Madkholkar has given emphasis to<\/p>\n
     the Prayers (A) [1] and [2] to (B) [2]
\n                            ig                                           as quoted in<\/p>\n
     foregoing Paragraph no.3.\n<\/p>\n
     9.         It is then argued that due to orders passed by<\/p>\n
     this    Court,          though     some        investigation             has       been<\/p>\n
     conducted, in fact, ample protection was already                                  given<\/p>\n
     by   police      to     members    of     Sananda         Family      due     to    the<\/p>\n
     protection sought from Hon’ble Chief Minister. Due to<\/p>\n
     this    protection,            latitude       and    helping        hand,         these<\/p>\n
     accused were able to take protection by applying for<\/p>\n
     anticipatory bail in the matters where cognizance of
\n     offences was taken. This has also resulted in causing<\/p>\n
     delay     in     taking     cognizance         and      in     permitting           the<\/p>\n
     accused        either     to     pressurize         the      complainants,            or<\/p>\n
     otherwise influence them either to get the complaints<\/p>\n
     disposed of or illegally closed.\n<\/p>\n
                                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                        7<\/span><\/p>\n
     10.      Petitioner has urged for :-\n<\/p>\n
              [i]        a fresh investigation of various
\n                         offences,   though   complaints are<\/p>\n
                         closed as compromised, disposed of
\n                         being civil matters etc;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              [ii]       The Govt. Resolution      dated 19th
\n                         October, 2005 [Annex.I to the first<\/p>\n
                         affidavit filed for and on behalf of
\n                         respondent no.4] be struck down or
\n                         read down to prevent its abuse, as in
\n                         present case.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     11.<\/p>\n
              In the midst of hearing, we had called upon<\/p>\n
     the learned Special Public Prosecutor – Senior Adv. Mr.<\/p>\n
     Subodh Dharmadhikari to state as to what is the stand<\/p>\n
     of the State on the action taken by the Collector in<\/p>\n
     the   form    of    Annexure-C,   informing       that       no    offence<\/p>\n
     should be registered in relation to family members of<\/p>\n
     respondent no.5, until the procedure prescribed therein
\n     was followed.\n<\/p>\n
     12.      Learned Senior Adv. Mr. Dharmadhikari informed<\/p>\n
     the Court in reply that he did not readily have the<\/p>\n
     instructions to state whether the State would like to<\/p>\n
     withdraw the said communication. He, however, expressed<\/p>\n
     that the course of action adopted in the present case<\/p>\n
     could   not    be    a   right    course    of     action,         though,<\/p>\n
     according to learned Sr. Adv. Mr. Dharmadhikari, to<\/p>\n
     avoid indiscreet use of Criminal Law and in order to<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                           8<\/span>
\n     prevent     harassment       of   honest     and    innocent         citizens<\/p>\n
     against false complaints, some control and restraints,<\/p>\n
     as    are   resorted    in    case   at    hand,     to    prevent        hasty<\/p>\n
     cognizance may be necessary.\n<\/p>\n
     13.         Mr.   Dharmadhikari,          learned    Senior        Advocate,<\/p>\n
     however, wanted time to secure instructions to be able
\n     to go on record on any of these concessions, in order<\/p>\n
     that he makes a statement only after instructions. We<\/p>\n
     find that when the matter was ordered to be listed for<\/p>\n
     final disposal at admission stage, the State ought to<\/p>\n
     have taken adequate measures and care for taking due<\/p>\n
     and    sufficient      instructions.        We,     therefore,         do    not<\/p>\n
     propose to adjourn the hearing any further.\n<\/p>\n
     14.         We would now deal with different grievances.\n<\/p>\n
                            Telephonic directions<\/p>\n
     15.         In so far as the telephonic message [Annex.E<\/p>\n
     to the petition] is concerned, of late, it is sought to<\/p>\n
     be disputed that         any such communication was at all<\/p>\n
     made.\n<\/p>\n
     16.         It is alleged that the statement of Mr. Padwal<\/p>\n
     has been recorded by Police Sub-Inspector, Buldana, on<\/p>\n
     14th February, 2008, in which Mr. Padwal denies to have<\/p>\n
                                                   ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                                  9<\/span>
\n     made any call to Police Station and communicated the<\/p>\n
     oral direction of Hon’ble Chief Minister.\n<\/p>\n
     17.          It is seen that since the investigation on<\/p>\n
     this point was inordinately delayed, it was but natural<\/p>\n
     that the telephone record prior to six months from the<\/p>\n
     date    of    demand      was        not        available        with       Mahanagar
\n     Telephone Nigam Limited.\n<\/p>\n
     18.          We see that this fact of the matter does not<\/p>\n
     need a discussion, since the direction referred to in<\/p>\n
     said telephonic message has come on record at page 35<\/p>\n
     of     paper-book      as       an     authentic          document          with      the<\/p>\n
     affidavit of the Respondent no.4, sworn by Tahsildar.\n<\/p>\n
     Said page 35 has not been marked as an Annexure to the<\/p>\n
     affidavit, however, it bears signature of said Shri<\/p>\n
     Ukanda Sakru Rathod, the Tahsildar, certifying it to be<\/p>\n
     a true copy.\n<\/p>\n
     19.          We    have    no    reason           to   disbelieve         that       when<\/p>\n
     Tahsildar has signed a document as a true copy,                                   it was
\n     meant to be a true copy.\n<\/p>\n
     20.          Moreover,      the        directions           of     Hon’ble         Chief<\/p>\n
     Minister,         contained      in        said    telephonic          message        are<\/p>\n
     rather    proved      by    the       communication              dated      5th    June,<\/p>\n
     2006, of      which a       typed copy is                at page 19               of the<\/p>\n
                                                            ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                      10<\/span>
\n     petition [Annexure ‘C’], while its photo copy certified<\/p>\n
     to be a true copy is on record at page 36 as unmarked<\/p>\n
     Annexure to the affidavit of the Tahsildar, which is<\/p>\n
     signed as a True Copy by Shri Ukhanda Sakru Rathod, the<\/p>\n
     Tahsildar.\n<\/p>\n
     21.       In these premises, it would be a matter of
\n     futile exercise to      waste any further energy on the<\/p>\n
     point of Annex.E. It will have to be taken that such<\/p>\n
     communication was made by or at the behest of someone<\/p>\n
     who was interested in making such communication, and<\/p>\n
     this Court holds that said telephonic communication was<\/p>\n
     made at the behest of the Respondent No.5.\n<\/p>\n
           Legality of Direction of Hon’ble Chief Minister<\/p>\n
     22.       As we see, the attempt is made by the State to<\/p>\n
     fit Annexure-C into the authority as available                    through<\/p>\n
     the Govt. Resolution dated 19th October, 2005.\n<\/p>\n
     23.       We   have   perused   Section     13A      of     the     Bombay<\/p>\n
     Money Lenders Act.      We quote it for ready reference as<\/p>\n
     below:-\n<\/p>\n
               “13A.Power of authorised officer to require
\n               production of records or documents<\/p>\n
                    For the purpose of verifying, whether
\n               the business of money-lending is carried on
\n               in accordance with the provisions of this
\n               Act any Registrar, Assistant Registrar or<\/p>\n
                                               ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                     11<\/span>
\n                any other officer authorised by the State
\n                Government in this behalf may require any<\/p>\n
                money-lender    or any person in respect of
\n                whom the Registrar, Assistant Registrar or
\n                the officer so authorised has reason to<\/p>\n
                believe that he is carrying on the business
\n                of money-lending in the State to produce
\n                any record or documents in his possession
\n                which in his opinion is relevant for the
\n                purpose and thereupon such money-lender or
\n                person   shall    produce  such  record   or<\/p>\n
                documents.     The    Registrar,   Assistant
\n                Registrar or Officer, so authorised may
\n                after reasonable notice at any reasonable
\n                time enter and search without warrant any
\n                premises where he believes such record or<\/p>\n
                documents to be and inspect such record or
\n                document and may ask any question necessary
\n                for interpreting or verifying such record.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     24.        The power under Section 13A of the said Act,<\/p>\n
     as referred to above, is an additional equipment and a<\/p>\n
     tool   provided    in   the   hands    of      the      Executives           to<\/p>\n
     effectively deprecate the vices sought to be remedied<\/p>\n
     by the Bombay Money Lenders Act.\n<\/p>\n
     25.        At the most, the Govt. Resolution dated 19th<\/p>\n
     October, 2005 can be construed to be a                      Consultative<\/p>\n
     Committee    who   would   guide    and   work       to     further        and<\/p>\n
     advance the object of deprecating the usurious money
\n     lending.    This Committee cannot be used to dilute the<\/p>\n
     powers of police or the authorities under the Bombay<\/p>\n
     Money Lenders Act.\n<\/p>\n
     26.        We, therefore, record our stern disapproval of<\/p>\n
     the approach of State Govt., in placing reliance on<\/p>\n
                                                 ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                         12<\/span>
\n     Govt. Resolution dated 19th October, 2005 to justify<\/p>\n
     its action taken through Annexure-C – letter dated 5th
\n     June,    2006   –    the    communication          of     Hon’ble         Chief<\/p>\n
     Minister’s directives by Collector, Buldana.\n<\/p>\n
     27.       We wishfully hoped that the respondent no.5<\/p>\n
     would come with a plea that being harassed by police<\/p>\n
     due to false and frivolous complaints made against him<\/p>\n
     with political motive etc., and as the higher level<\/p>\n
     police   officersig   did    not    pay      any    attention          to    his<\/p>\n
     complaints, he was constrained to approach the Hon’ble<\/p>\n
     Chief    Minister,    and    that       in   such       higher       superior<\/p>\n
     Executive power, Hon’ble Chief Minister has examined<\/p>\n
     the matter. No plea is coming forward, suggesting such<\/p>\n
     semblance. Copy of complaint submitted by respondent<\/p>\n
     no.5 to Hon’ble Chief Minister leading to communication<\/p>\n
     [Annexure ‘C’] is not placed before us.\n<\/p>\n
     28.       Respondent       no.5    is    happy      and     content         with<\/p>\n
     making certain allegations and no substantive plea of<\/p>\n
     aforesaid type or akin thereto is advanced.                         All that<\/p>\n
     he has said in his affidavit reads as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
               “…………………………………..
\n               ………..   The    respondent   disputes
\n               correctness thereof. It is submitted at
\n               the relevant time the elections to various
\n               local authorities were to be held in the
\n               District, hence a planned valification
\n               campaign was undertaken by the opposition
\n               leaders with the support of some police
\n               officers these people wanted to persecute<\/p>\n
                                                   ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:26 :::<\/span>
\n                                      13<\/span>
\n               the respondent’s son by handling false and
\n               baseless allegations against his father<\/p>\n
               to tarnish his political prospects and
\n               career. And raised false doubts in respect
\n               of investigation and claimed investigation<\/p>\n
               independently     without    any     bias.
\n               ……………”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     [Quoted from      page   141   of     the     paper-book            of     Writ
\n     Petition].\n<\/p>\n
     29.       The manner in which the petition was initially
\n     opposed and later investigation was conducted makes it<\/p>\n
     clear that there was a meeting at the behest of the<\/p>\n
     Hon’ble   Chief<\/p>\n
     respondent no.5 with the Hon’ble Chief Minister, where<\/p>\n
                       Minister     gave    oral      directions           to    the<\/p>\n
     Collector, Buldana, and he has then issued a letter<\/p>\n
     dated 5th June, 2006.\n<\/p>\n
     30.       The letter dated 5th June, 2006 and telephonic<\/p>\n
     message based thereon recorded in the Station Diary,<\/p>\n
     copy whereof is at Annexure-E page 21, and at page 35<\/p>\n
     [Annexure to the affidavit of Tahsildar] are, thus, the<\/p>\n
     exhibits of gross abuse of power by the concerned.\n<\/p>\n
               We,     therefore,         hold       that         these          two
\n     communications [Annexures-C and E] deserve to be struck<\/p>\n
     down.\n<\/p>\n
     31.       Considering limited prayers contained in the<\/p>\n
     petition, we find that the purpose of the petition is<\/p>\n
     substantially     served,      yet     the       issue         cannot         be<\/p>\n
                                                  ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:27 :::<\/span>
\n                                        14<\/span>
\n     considered to have reached foreclosure.\n<\/p>\n
           As to complaints against the Respondent No.5<\/p>\n
     32.       We see from the chart annexed to the affidavit<\/p>\n
     referred to above that in the complaint filed by                         Mr.<\/p>\n
     Sarangdhar Chavan, i.e., the petitioner, a charge-sheet<\/p>\n
     has been filed for offences under Sections 341, 342,<\/p>\n
     363, 392, 504 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal<\/p>\n
     Code, and read with Section 32B of the Bombay Money<\/p>\n
     Lenders     Act,   1946,    and    the   criminal        case       is     in<\/p>\n
     progress.\n<\/p>\n
     33.       Petitioner’s      grievance    is    that       there       is     a<\/p>\n
     rampant money lending and it needs to be controlled in<\/p>\n
     the interest of poor farmers of Vidarbha.\n<\/p>\n
     34.       We are of the view that whenever a grievance<\/p>\n
     against illegal lending           comes to the notice of the<\/p>\n
     respondents, punctual action be taken.\n<\/p>\n
     35.       Whenever    any   individual      complainant           against<\/p>\n
     Respondent No.5 comes forward and furnishes a grievance<\/p>\n
     that he has either not withdrawn the complaint and that<\/p>\n
     it was withdrawn due to duress etc., such grievance<\/p>\n
     should always be open for consideration, and should be<\/p>\n
     considered.\n<\/p>\n
                                               ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:27 :::<\/span>
\n                                        15<\/span><\/p>\n
               The disposal of petition would not come in the<\/p>\n
     way of officers to investigate it.\n<\/p>\n
     36.       We have no room of doubt in our mind that had<\/p>\n
     the petition not been filed, no investigation would<\/p>\n
     have at all been done.        We, at the same time, feel that<\/p>\n
     even   after      filing     of     petition,          since         adequate
\n     protection was already given to the respondent no.5 and<\/p>\n
     his family members, he had sufficient opportunity of<\/p>\n
     getting   the    offences
\n                       ig         reported        against       him     screened,<\/p>\n
     compounded      etc.   One   does      not    know      how      many       such<\/p>\n
     instances of illegal money lending do exist.                          We only<\/p>\n
     express that the superior power of the Executive is not<\/p>\n
     brought to the abuse in the manner it has been done in<\/p>\n
     the present case.\n<\/p>\n
     37.       Coming to the point of the compensatory costs<\/p>\n
     prayed for by the petitioner, in all fairness, learned<\/p>\n
     Adv. Mr. Madkholkar, who argued that the petitioner is<\/p>\n
     representing cause as if a Public Interest Litigation.\n<\/p>\n
     Mr. Madkholkar, however, urges that in order to avoid
\n     such recurrence, there must be some chastisement                               to<\/p>\n
     the respondents.\n<\/p>\n
     38.       We, therefore, award token cost of Rs.25,000<\/p>\n
     [rupees twenty-five thousand only], and direct that the<\/p>\n
                                                   ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:23:27 :::<\/span>
\n                                       16<\/span>
\n     said amount be paid by the State Govt., within six<\/p>\n
     weeks    from   today.   No    extension     of     time      should        be<\/p>\n
     applied for.      Cost, when deposited, be paid to Advocate<\/p>\n
     for the petitioner.      The Judgment be circulated by the<\/p>\n
     Chief Secretary of the State to all Hon’ble Ministers<\/p>\n
     and     their     Personal     Secretaries,         Secretaries             of<\/p>\n
     different Departments of the Government, in order that
\n     what is deprecated does not recur.\n<\/p>\n
     39.       With above observations, Rule is made absolute<\/p>\n
     in terms of Paras 30 and 38 above.\n<\/p>\n
               JUDGE                                             JUDGE\n\n                                   -0-0-0-0-\n      \n   \n\n\n\n     |hedau|\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 14:23:27 :::<\/span>\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009 Bench: A. H. Joshi, A. B. Chaudhari 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Writ Petition No. 330 of 2006 Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing Chavan, aged about 51 years, resident of Hingna Karegaon, Tq. Khamgaon, Distt. Buldana. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-132788","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-07T11:15:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-07T11:15:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2753,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-07T11:15:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-07T11:15:18+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-07T11:15:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009"},"wordCount":2753,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009","name":"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-07T11:15:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarangdharsingh-shivdassing-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sarangdharsingh Shivdassing vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132788","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=132788"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132788\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132788"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132788"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132788"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}