{"id":135756,"date":"2008-12-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008"},"modified":"2015-06-13T06:45:29","modified_gmt":"2015-06-13T01:15:29","slug":"mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008<\/div>\n
Bench: Nishita Mhatre<\/div>\n
bsb\n\n                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n                             WRIT PETITION NO. 6382 OF 1996\n\n\n\n\n                                                                               \n      Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & ors.                       ... Petitioners\n\n\n\n\n                                                       \n              v\/s\n      State of Maharashtra & ors.                              ... Respondents\n\n\n      Mr.C.P.Deogirikar for the petitioners.\n\n\n\n\n                                                      \n      Mr.S.D.Rayrikar, A.G.P. for rpespondent Nos.1 to 3.\n\n      Mr.Sachin Shete i\/by P.G.Karande for the Resp.No.5.\n\n\n\n\n                                            \n                                          CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.\n\n\n\n      ORAL JUDGMENT:\n           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
                              ig          DATED: 4TH DECEMBER, 2008\n                            \n      1.   The     petitioners            have impugned the        order       of     the\n\n      Divisional        Joint       Registrar,     Co-operative             Societies\n        \n\n\n<\/pre>\n
      (Appeal), Mumbai, by which he has dismissed the revision<\/p>\n
      application        filed by the petitioners and confirmed                       the<\/p>\n
      orders    passed         by the Assistant Registrar on                20.2.1993<\/p>\n
      and 10.10.1994.\n<\/p>\n
      2.   The petitioners were members of the respondent No.5<\/p>\n
      Society     and        were    in    fact   members    of      the     Managing<\/p>\n
      Committee         of     the    Society      during    the      period        from<\/p>\n
      31.1.1982     to 30.9.1990.           A General Body meeting of                 the<\/p>\n
      Society     was held on 30.9.1990 when it was resolved that<\/p>\n
                                                       ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:07:03 :::<\/span>
\n                                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
    a     Committee        should be appointed to conduct an                        enquiry<\/p>\n
    into     the misuse of the Society’s funds by the                             Managing<\/p>\n
    Committee.        The Committee called upon the petitioners to<\/p>\n
    provide        information          to it in respect of the misuse                       of<\/p>\n
    funds.         The     petitioners        requested          the      Committee          to<\/p>\n
    provide        them details of the information which they were<\/p>\n
    expected        to     furnish.       A resolution was passed                   at     the<\/p>\n
    Annual        General Body meeting held on 26.1.1992 declaring<\/p>\n
    that     the     petitioners          will      be     responsible            for      the<\/p>\n
    corruption during the period from 31.1.1982 to 30.9.1990<\/p>\n
    with     respect        to     the Society.           The General          Body      also<\/p>\n
    resolved        that<\/p>\n
                             the        flats allotted to           the      petitioners<\/p>\n
    should        not be sold by then till a decision was taken by<\/p>\n
    either the Court or the Government.\n<\/p>\n
    3.      An     enquiry was instituted under Section 83 of                              the<\/p>\n
    Maharashtra           Co-operative       Societies            Act,       1960.         The<\/p>\n
    enquiry         was      initially           conducted             by      one       Shri<\/p>\n
    P.V.Deshpande           but     was      later        abandoned.           Thereafter<\/p>\n
    another        enquiry officer, Shri Khadakkar, was                          appointed<\/p>\n
    and     he was directed to complete the enquiry within                                 two<\/p>\n
    months.         The     petitioners appeared before                     the     Enquiry<\/p>\n
    officer        and submitted whatever information was required<\/p>\n
    by     him.      The enquiry was completed and the report                              was<\/p>\n
    submitted        by     the     Enquiry officer,             Khadakkar          to     the<\/p>\n
    Society        through        the      Deputy        Registrar,         Co-operative<\/p>\n
                                                            ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:07:03 :::<\/span>
\n                                             3<\/span><\/p>\n
    Societies,          “T”    Ward.     The    report    was      however         not<\/p>\n
    furnished       to the petitioners, despite the                petitioners’<\/p>\n
    request for the same.\n<\/p>\n
    4.      The     petitioners         were then informed that            a     fresh<\/p>\n
    enquiry       was     instituted under Section 83 of the Act                     in<\/p>\n
    respect of the same subject matter for which the earlier<\/p>\n
    enquiry       was     conducted by Khadakkar.           The      petitioners<\/p>\n
    questioned          the    appointment of another enquiry               officer<\/p>\n
    when     they       had already faced the enquiry             conducted          by<\/p>\n
    Khadakkar.           However, the Deputy Registrar insisted on a<\/p>\n
    fresh<\/p>\n
              enquiry by his order dated 10.1.1995.                    A revision<\/p>\n
    application          was    filed    by the petitioners          before        the<\/p>\n
    Joint     Registrar,         Co-operative Societies.             The       Deputy<\/p>\n
    Registrar       was directed to furnish the enquiry report of<\/p>\n
    Khadakkar       to the petitioners.         The revision application<\/p>\n
    was     dismissed          by the Joint Registrar and the order                  of<\/p>\n
    the Deputy Registrar appointing a new enquiry officer to<\/p>\n
    conduct an enquiry into the same charges was confirmed.\n<\/p>\n
    5.      The     report       of the enquiry conducted          against         the<\/p>\n
    petitioners          by    Mr.Khadakkar     has been annexed            to     the<\/p>\n
    petition.           It indicates that the enquiry was                completed<\/p>\n
    and in conclusion it was held as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
                  “Conclusion.  The members of the Managing
\n                  Committee who are for the period 81-82 to<\/p>\n
                                                    ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:07:03 :::<\/span>
\n                                                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
                      30.6.90 will be held responsible for every
\n                      losses of the society in respect of the
\n                      building construction of the society. As per
\n                      the opinion authorised Valuer should appoint
\n                      to assess the construction     cost of    the<\/p>\n
                      buildings of the Society. And the difference
\n                      between the assessed value and actually paid
\n                      to the contractor in respect of the building<\/p>\n
                      construction to be recovered from the members
\n                      of the Managing Committee who are for the
\n                      period i.e. 81-82 to 30.6.90 if it was excess
\n                      paid.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    6.      A     perusal of Section 83 of the Act indicates                                  that<\/p>\n
    the     Registrar may, on his own or on an application made<\/p>\n
    by     the members of the society, hold an enquiry into the<\/p>\n
    constitution,                working    and       financial        condition           of     a<\/p>\n
    society.               The<\/p>\n
                                   sub-section (5) of Section                 83     provides<\/p>\n
    that        the        Registrar may withdraw any enquiry                       from        the<\/p>\n
    officer           to     whom it is entrusted and hold                    the      enquiry<\/p>\n
    himself           or     entrust it to any other person as he                          deems<\/p>\n
    fit.        The question therefore is, whether once an enquiry<\/p>\n
    is     completed             can it be entrusted to any other                      enquiry<\/p>\n
    officer only in order to ensure that the delinquents are<\/p>\n
    found        guilty by the enquiry officer.                      Section 83(5), in<\/p>\n
    my     opinion, is unambiguous.                   The Registrar may withdraw<\/p>\n
    any     enquiry from the officer conducting it and                                 entrust<\/p>\n
    it     to     any        other       person or      hold      it     himself.             This<\/p>\n
    obviously              would    indicate that the enquiry must                       be     in<\/p>\n
    progress.               If     the   enquiry       is   completed,             then         the<\/p>\n
    question           of        withdrawing      any enquiry from              an     officer<\/p>\n
    would        not arise.           The word “withdrawal” would mean that<\/p>\n
                                                               ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:07:03 :::<\/span>
\n                                            5<\/span><\/p>\n
    the   enquiry          was being conducted by an officer and                  the<\/p>\n
    Registrar       either      on his own or otherwise,            stops       that<\/p>\n
    enquiry     and        either    entrusts it to     somebody         else       or<\/p>\n
    conduct it himself.\n<\/p>\n
    7.    In    the present case, admittedly, the                 enquiry         was<\/p>\n
    completed,        therefore,       the question of       recalling          that<\/p>\n
    enquiry     and        entrusting    it to somebody else            does      not<\/p>\n
    arise.          The     revisional     authority     ought          to       have<\/p>\n
    considered        the objections and contentions raised in the<\/p>\n
    revision application on the merits of the first enquiry.\n<\/p>\n
    The order of the revisional authority indicates that the<\/p>\n
    revision        has been dismissed only on the ground that the<\/p>\n
    Deputy     Registrar had the power to withdraw the                     enquiry<\/p>\n
    if it was not being conducted properly.\n<\/p>\n
    8.    In    my opinion, the order of the             Divisional             Joint<\/p>\n
    Registrar       must be set aside and the matter will have to<\/p>\n
    be    remanded.           The     revision   application            must        be<\/p>\n
    considered        on     merits.    The revisional       authority          must<\/p>\n
    decide     as     to     whether the contentions         raised        by     the<\/p>\n
    petitioners        in their revision application in respect of<\/p>\n
    the enquiry conducted by Shri Khadakkar are correct.\n<\/p>\n
    9.    The       petition        is accordingly allowed.           Rule      made<\/p>\n
    absolute.\n<\/p>\n
                                                   ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:07:03 :::<\/span>
\n                                   6<\/span><\/p>\n
    10.    Revision Application No.42 of 1995 is remanded                  to<\/p>\n
    the   Divisional   Joint Registrar to hear and decide                the<\/p>\n
    revision   on   merits,   as to whether the report            of     the<\/p>\n
    enquiry officer Shri Khadakkar can be accepted.\n<\/p>\n
                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:07:03 :::<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008 Bench: Nishita Mhatre bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6382 OF 1996 Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & ors. … Petitioners v\/s State of Maharashtra & ors. … Respondents Mr.C.P.Deogirikar […]<\/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-135756","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008 - 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\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-12-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-06-13T01:15:29+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-13T01:15:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":978,\"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\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-13T01:15:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008 - 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\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-06-13T01:15:29+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-13T01:15:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008"},"wordCount":978,"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\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008","name":"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-13T01:15:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-gajanan-mahadeo-kulkarni-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-4-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mr.Gajanan Mahadeo Kulkarni & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 4 December, 2008"}]},{"@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\/135756","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=135756"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/135756\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=135756"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=135756"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=135756"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}