{"id":143203,"date":"2010-08-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010"},"modified":"2018-03-24T09:07:44","modified_gmt":"2018-03-24T03:37:44","slug":"sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Bombay High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Shrihari P. Davare<\/div>\n<pre>                                            1\n\n            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY \n\n\n\n\n                                                                                 \n                              BENCH AT AURANGABAD\n\n                    CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.574\/2010\n\n\n\n\n                                                         \n     Sanjay s\/o Shivaji Dhapse,\n     age 39 years, Occ. Business,\n\n\n\n\n                                                        \n     R\/o House No.1483, Vanjar Galli,\n     Ahmednagar, \n     Tq. &amp; Dist. Ahmednagar.                                        Petitioner\n\n\n\n\n                                        \n     V E R S U S \n                       \n     1.    The State of Maharashtra.\n                      \n     2.    The Police Inspector,\n           Tophkhana Police Station,\n           Ahmednagar, \n           Tq. &amp; Distict Ahmednagar.                                Respondents.\n      \n\n\n                                                 ----\n   \n\n\n\n     Shri S.M, Ganachari h\/f Mr. Rajendrraa Deshmukh, Advocate for the \n     petitioner.\n     Mrs. B. R. Khekale, learned APP for respondents.\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                 -----\n      \n                                  CORAM          : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.\n<\/pre>\n<pre>                                  DATE           : 2nd AUGUST, 2010.\n\n\n\n\n\n     ORAL JUDGMENT :-\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>     1.             Heard learned respective counsel for the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>     2.             Rule.     Rule   made   returnable   forthwith   and   with   the <\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                         ::: Downloaded on &#8211; 09\/06\/2013 16:13:49 :::<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     consent of parties, taken up for final hearing at the admission stage.\n<\/p>\n<p>     3.             By   the   present   petition,   filed   by   the   petitioner   under <\/p>\n<p>     Article   227   of   Constitution   of   India,   pray   that   the   impugned   order <\/p>\n<p>     dated   16.2.2010   passed   by   learned   Additional   Sessions   Judge, <\/p>\n<p>     Ahmednagar in Criminal Revision Application No.162\/2009 as well as <\/p>\n<p>     impugned   order   dated   4.7.2009   passed   by   learned   Chief   Judicial <\/p>\n<p>     Magistrate   Ahmendagar,   in   Criminal   Miscellaneous   Application   No.<\/p>\n<p>     213\/2009 be quashed and set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>     4.             The petitioner claims to be the Ahmednagar District Head <\/p>\n<p>     of All India Human Rights and Citizen Option and also is a Corporator, <\/p>\n<p>     had   filed   an   application   to   the   Hindustan   Petroleum   Corporation <\/p>\n<p>     Limited   Chikalthana   (henceforth   referred   to   as   &#8216;HPCL&#8221;)   for   getting <\/p>\n<p>     information  under Right to Information Act, 2005 on 2.1.2009.   The <\/p>\n<p>     petitioner contends that, he was asked by HPCL to send demand draft <\/p>\n<p>     of Rs.10\/- on 13.1.2009.  Accordingly the petitioner sent demand draft <\/p>\n<p>     of   Rs.10\/-,   drawn   on   State   Bank   of   India   on   24.1.2009   to   HPCL.\n<\/p>\n<p>     However,   Senior   Regional   Manager   and   Central   Public   Information <\/p>\n<p>     Officer of HPCL informed the  petitioner that said information was not <\/p>\n<p>     available on record as well as  contended that since the information is in <\/p>\n<p>     respect of the commercial value of the company,same cannot be provided, by <\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                          ::: Downloaded on &#8211; 09\/06\/2013 16:13:49 :::<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                 3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     communication   dated   6.2.2009.     Copy   thereof   is   annexed   at   (Exh.A <\/p>\n<p>     page 18).\n<\/p>\n<p>     5.              Hence,   it   is   the   contention   of   the   petitioner   that <\/p>\n<p>     considering the approach and attitude of HPCL, the petitioner felt that <\/p>\n<p>     HPCL has deliberately refused to give him the information and cheated <\/p>\n<p>     him,   and   therefore   filed   complaint   with   Tophkhana   police   Station, <\/p>\n<p>     Ahmednagar on 11.2.2009 and copy thereof is annexed at (Exh.&#8217;B&#8217; page <\/p>\n<p>     20).   However, since the police authorities did not take cognizance of <\/p>\n<p>     the   said   complaint,   the   petitioner   filed   Criminal   Miscellaneous <\/p>\n<p>     Application   No.213\/2009   before   learned   Chief   Judicial   Magistrate, <\/p>\n<p>     Ahmednagar and prayed for issuance of directions under section 156 <\/p>\n<p>     (3)   of   Code   of   Criminal   Procedure   on   1.4.2009   and   learned   Chief <\/p>\n<p>     Judicial  Magistrate  issued  show  cause  notice  to  the  non  applicants, <\/p>\n<p>     why directions sought by the applicant should not be issued, by order <\/p>\n<p>     dated   15.5.2009   and   copy   thereof   is   annexed   at   (Exh.C   collectively <\/p>\n<p>     page   22   to   25).     However,   after   hearing   both   parties,   learned   Chief <\/p>\n<p>     Judicial   Magistrate   Ahmednagar   rejected   the   said   application   by <\/p>\n<p>     passing order on 4.7.2009 and copy thereof is annexed at (Exh.C colly.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Page 26 and 27).\n<\/p>\n<p>     6.              Being aggrieved and dis-satisfied by the said order, dated <\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                           ::: Downloaded on &#8211; 09\/06\/2013 16:13:49 :::<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                              4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     4.7.2009 the petitioner preferred a Criminal Revision Application No.<\/p>\n<p>     162\/2009 before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar on <\/p>\n<p>     18.9.2009 and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar issued <\/p>\n<p>     notice   to   the   respondents   therein   on   29.9.2009.                      The <\/p>\n<p>     prosecution\/respondent filed its say in the said revision on 18.1.2010 <\/p>\n<p>     and submitted that said revision be dismissed since not maintainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>     However,   learned   Additional   Sessions   Judge,   Ahmednagar   dismissed <\/p>\n<p>     said   revision   by   passing   order   on   16.2.2010   and   copy   thereof   is <\/p>\n<p>     annexed at (Exh.&#8217;D&#8217; colly page 28 to 38).\n<\/p>\n<p>     7.             Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by both said impugned <\/p>\n<p>     orders, dated 4\/7\/2009 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, <\/p>\n<p>     Ahmednagar and order dated 16.2.2010 passed by learned Additional <\/p>\n<p>     Sessions   Judge,   Ahmednagar,   the   petitioner   has   preferred   present <\/p>\n<p>     petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and prayed for <\/p>\n<p>     the quashment of both the said impugned orders.\n<\/p>\n<p>     8.             After hearing rival submissions advanced by both learned <\/p>\n<p>     respective counsel for the parties, the controversy revolves around the <\/p>\n<p>     aspect that &#8220;Whether the remedy is available to the petitioner under <\/p>\n<p>     the provisions of Right to Information Act, upon refusal of information <\/p>\n<p>     sought as of right ?&#8221; Learned APP pointed out that since the matter <\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                        ::: Downloaded on &#8211; 09\/06\/2013 16:13:49 :::<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     comes   under   Right   to   Information   Act   and   since   the   applicant   has <\/p>\n<p>     grievance regarding non supply of certain documents\/information, he <\/p>\n<p>     has remedy available to approach to higher authority in the appeal and <\/p>\n<p>     he could have availed such remedy but inspite of taking recourse to the <\/p>\n<p>     said forum available to him, he filed complaint with the police station <\/p>\n<p>     and   thereafter   approached   to   the   Court   by   way   of   Criminal <\/p>\n<p>     Miscellaneous   Application   No.213\/2009   and   therefore   learned   Chief <\/p>\n<p>     Judicial Magistrate Ahmednagar rightly rejected said application and <\/p>\n<p>     consequently learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar rightly <\/p>\n<p>     dismissed   Criminal   Revision   application   preferred   against   the   said <\/p>\n<p>     order.\n<\/p>\n<p>     9.              Considering   the   facts   and   circumstances,   apparently,   it <\/p>\n<p>     appears   that,   subject   matter   is   within   the   purview   of   Right   To <\/p>\n<p>     Information   Act,   2005   and   statutory   remedy   is   available   to   the <\/p>\n<p>     petitioner   thereunder   upon   refusal   of   the   information   sought   as   of <\/p>\n<p>     right   and   petitioner   may   avail   such   remedy,   if   he   desires   so,   and <\/p>\n<p>     therefore, no interference is called for in the aforesaid impugned orders <\/p>\n<p>     dated   4.7.2009   and   16.2.2010,   and   accordingly,   present   petition <\/p>\n<p>     deserves to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                          ::: Downloaded on &#8211; 09\/06\/2013 16:13:49 :::<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                             6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     10.          In   the   result,   present   petition   stands   dismissed.     Rule <\/p>\n<p>     stands discharged accordingly.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n\n\n\n                                                       \n                                                      \n                                                   ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. )\n\n\n\n     aaa\/574.10                                  ***\n\n\n\n\n                                        \n                      \n                     \n      \n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                       ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 16:13:49 :::<\/span>\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Bombay High Court Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010 Bench: Shrihari P. Davare 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.574\/2010 Sanjay s\/o Shivaji Dhapse, age 39 years, Occ. Business, R\/o House No.1483, Vanjar Galli, Ahmednagar, Tq. &amp; Dist. Ahmednagar. Petitioner V E [&hellip;]<\/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-143203","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-24T03:37:44+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-24T03:37:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":778,\"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\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-24T03:37:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-24T03:37:44+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-24T03:37:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010"},"wordCount":778,"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\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010","name":"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-24T03:37:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanjay-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-2-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sanjay vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 August, 2010"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/143203","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=143203"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143203\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143203"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143203"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143203"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}