{"id":145324,"date":"2009-09-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009"},"modified":"2018-04-14T22:07:45","modified_gmt":"2018-04-14T16:37:45","slug":"manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009<\/div>\n
Bench: V.R. Kingaonkar<\/div>\n
                           1\n\n      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n\n           CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n\n\n\n                                                            \n        CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5336 OF 2003\n\n\n\n\n                                    \n                         WITH\n        CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5337 OF 2003\n\n\n\n\n                                   \n    1.Manisha Manohar Gokhale,\n      Age   50 yrs. Occ.Housewife\n    2.Manohar Purshotam Gokhale,\n      Age   55 yrs. Occ. Nil.\n      Both Adults, an Indian\n\n\n\n\n                              \n      Inhabitants, residing at\n      Room No. B 14-15, Palanji\n                 \n      Sojpal Chawl,C.K.Bole Rd.,\n      Near D Silva High School,\n      Dadar, Bombay 400 028.                 ..Applicants.\n                \n      versus\n\n    1.State of Maharashtra\n      \n\n      (At the instance of Sahakar\n      Nagar Police Station)\n   \n\n\n\n    2.Smt.Vijaya P. Joshi,\n      Age : 71 yrs, Occ.Housewife,\n      R\/o : Mangal Murthy Complex,\n      Flat No. 21, C Bldg., Pune-\n\n\n\n\n\n      Satara Rd, Dhankawadi,\n      Pune    411 043.\n    3.Smt. Mandakini M. Apte,\n      Age : 65 yrs.Occ.Housewife,\n      R\/o : B\/204, Manali Arcade,\n\n\n\n\n\n      Pune-Satara Rd, Near Padmawati\n      Bridge,\n      Pune    411 009.\n    4.Smt. Suman K. Phadnis,\n      Age : 51 yrs.Occ.Housewife,\n      R\/o : 6\/85, Jay-Hanuman Hsg.Soc.,\n      Suhas Rd., Vile-Parle (E),\n      Pune    400 057.\n    5.On behalf of all above complainants\n      The power of attorney holder and\n\n\n\n                                    ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 15:07:14 :::\n                                       2\n\n        Complainant himself --\n        Shri Mahadeo Bhikaji Apte,\n        Age : 72 yrs. Occu.Retired,\n\n\n\n\n                                                                          \n        Residing : same as complainant\n        no.2.                                             ..Respondents\n\n\n\n\n                                                  \n                           =====\n    Mr.A.S.Khandeparkar, Advocate for applicants.\n    Smt.A.A.Mane   APP for State.\n    None present for respondent nos. 2 to 5.\n\n\n\n\n                                                 \n                                    =====\n\n                                      CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR, J.\n<\/pre>\n
                                      DATED : 25 th  SEPTEMBER, 2009.\n<\/p>\n
    ORAL JUDGMENT:\n<\/p>\n
      1.Both these criminal applications filed under<\/p>\n
        section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code are<\/p>\n
        being    decided      together       in    as     much        as      they<\/p>\n
        arise out of the similar state of facts.\n<\/p>\n
      2.The applicants in both the applications have<\/p>\n
        come    out    with   a     case    that      they        have        been<\/p>\n
        falsely       involved       in     criminal         prosecutions<\/p>\n
        initiated by the respondent no.2 Smt. Vijaya<\/p>\n
        Joshi.    The applicant in context of criminal<\/p>\n
        application no. 5337 of 2003 and the applicant<\/p>\n
        no.1 in the companion application is the real<\/p>\n
        sister    of    the        respondent      no.2           Smt.Vijaya<\/p>\n
        Joshi.        They are in all four sisters and 2<\/p>\n
                                                  ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:07:14 :::<\/span>
\n                                     3<\/span><\/p>\n
      brothers.           Their     father      has      left         certain<\/p>\n
      movable       and    immovable          property         at       Velas,<\/p>\n
      Taluka       Mandangad.      The     respondent            no.2         and<\/p>\n
      other two sisters desired to initiate dispute<\/p>\n
      against        their        two    brothers            about            the<\/p>\n
      properties of their father.                Their father died<\/p>\n
      on     8th    November       1970.          The        petitioner<\/p>\n
      Smt.Manisha initially had joined them.                                  The<\/p>\n
      four     sisters
\n                       ig    jointly       decided         to       initiate<\/p>\n
      proceedings to stake legal claim in respect of<\/p>\n
      their rights.          They together prepared a power<\/p>\n
      of attorney.           The remaining three sisters of<\/p>\n
      the applicant-Smt.Manisha called for a meeting<\/p>\n
      on 3rd December 2000 at Pune.\n<\/p>\n
    3.The husband of applicant-Smt. Manisha who is<\/p>\n
      applicant      no.2     in    criminal       application                No.<\/p>\n
      5336 of 2003, attended the said meeting.                                  He<\/p>\n
      informed the other three sisters of applicant-\n<\/p>\n
      Smt.Manisha that he was instructed by her to<\/p>\n
      tell them that she was no more interested in<\/p>\n
      proceedings         against       the     two      brothers.              He<\/p>\n
      informed them that she was not ready to file<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:07:14 :::<\/span>
\n                                       4<\/span><\/p>\n
      any proceeding against her two brothers. He<\/p>\n
      also    told      that    she       has    withdrawn              from        the<\/p>\n
      common power of attorney which was in favour<\/p>\n
      of    Mahadeo      Bhikaji      Apte       to       look        after         the<\/p>\n
      litigation on their behalf.\n<\/p>\n
    4.A notice was thereafter sent to applicant-Smt.\n<\/p>\n
      Manisha by the advocate of the other sisters.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                         \n      It    was    alleged       that      she        had      attempted              to\n\n      assist      her\n                        \n                         brothers         in    their         illegal           acts.\n\n      The    notice       sent     by      Mr.        Madhukar              Limaye,\n                       \n      Advocate,         was     replied         on       behalf            of       the\n\n      applicant-Smt.Manisha.\n      \n\n\n<\/pre>\n
    5.It is not necessary to elaborately set out the<\/p>\n
      tenor of the notice correspondence. It would<\/p>\n
      suffice      the    purpose         to    say       that        applicant-\n<\/p>\n
      Smt.Manisha informed her withdrawal from the<\/p>\n
      power of attorney executed in favour of the<\/p>\n
      Mahadeo      Bhikaji       Apte      and        also       communicated<\/p>\n
      that she was not interested in any kind of<\/p>\n
      litigation with the brothers.                        Thereafter, the<\/p>\n
      respondent         no.2         Vijaya          Joshi           instituted<\/p>\n
      private      cases       against          the      applicants.                The<\/p>\n
                                                      ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:07:14 :::<\/span>
\n                                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
      complaint      applications        were     referred             bythe<\/p>\n
      learned judicial Magistrate for investigation<\/p>\n
      under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure<\/p>\n
      Code.     On    basis    of    the    material             gathered<\/p>\n
      during    the    course       of     investigation,                  two<\/p>\n
      separate chargesheets have been filed against<\/p>\n
      the applicants.         In F.I.R. No.150\/2002, the<\/p>\n
      applicant-Smt     Manisha      Gokhale,         is       shown         as<\/p>\n
      accused no.3 alongwith her two brothers.                             The<\/p>\n
      charge against them is for offence punishable<\/p>\n
      under Sections 406, 420, 511, 507 read with<\/p>\n
      Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.                          In the<\/p>\n
      F.I.R. No. 151 of 2002, the charge against the<\/p>\n
      applicant       Smt.Manisha          and       her           husband<\/p>\n
      alongwith their advocate who had given reply<\/p>\n
      notice    is    for     offences       punishable                under<\/p>\n
      Sections. 406, 417, 420, 511, 506, 503 read<\/p>\n
      with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.\n<\/p>\n
    6.Heard    learned counsel Mr.Khandeparkar for the<\/p>\n
      applicants,     and   learned       APP    for       the       State.\n<\/p>\n
      Though, these applications were on board since<\/p>\n
      23rd September 2009 and have been heard since<\/p>\n
                                             ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:07:14 :::<\/span>
\n                                    6<\/span><\/p>\n
      then,   none       has   appeared    for       the       respondent<\/p>\n
      nos. 2 to 5.\n<\/p>\n
    7.On going through the relevant material, it is<\/p>\n
      amply      clear     that    there       is     absolutely               no<\/p>\n
      scintilla      of    evidence       on    record          to       infer<\/p>\n
      complicity of the applicants in the context of<\/p>\n
      either of the charges leveled against them. In<\/p>\n
      fact, the stand of the applicant-Smt Manisha<\/p>\n
      was that, she did not wish to claim any share<\/p>\n
      in the property left by her deceased father.\n<\/p>\n
      The other three sisters cannot legally compel<\/p>\n
      her   to    join    them    in    such    property             dispute<\/p>\n
      against their two brothers. So, whether she<\/p>\n
      had connived with her brothers or not, is of<\/p>\n
      no    significance.         The     criminal           cases           are<\/p>\n
      instituted against the applicants without any<\/p>\n
      reason or rhyme.            The applicants have not at<\/p>\n
      all misappropriated any part of the property<\/p>\n
      of    complainant-Smt.Vijaya             Joshi         (respondent<\/p>\n
      no.2) nor they have dishonestly cheated her in<\/p>\n
      order to obtain any valuable property.                             These<\/p>\n
      are the classic examples as to how the process<\/p>\n
                                               ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:07:14 :::<\/span>
\n                                    7<\/span><\/p>\n
      of criminal court is abused by the litigant.\n<\/p>\n
      In fact, the very act of the respondent no.2-\n<\/p>\n
      Smt.Vijaya Joshi to file complaint against the<\/p>\n
      learned advocate of the applicants is rather<\/p>\n
      indicative     of    impropriety.              I    am    told        that<\/p>\n
      learned advocate Shri Shashikant Dharwadkar is<\/p>\n
      not alive.       He was joined as accused no.3 in<\/p>\n
      the context of F.I.R. No.151 of 2008.                                   His<\/p>\n
      only    act<\/p>\n
                    was      to   reply    the           notice       as      per<\/p>\n
      instructions of the applicants.                       Had he been<\/p>\n
      alive,   perhaps       compensation         could         have        been<\/p>\n
      granted to him.             It is only because of the<\/p>\n
      relationship         between        the        applicants               and<\/p>\n
      respondent no.2 that I am not willing to grant<\/p>\n
      compensation which is likely to further strain<\/p>\n
      the relationship and make them bitter enimies<\/p>\n
      forever.\n<\/p>\n
    8. Considering     the    averments         in       the    complaints<\/p>\n
      and the material gathered during the so called<\/p>\n
      investigation,         it   would    transpire              that        the<\/p>\n
      applicants have not committed any offence as<\/p>\n
      such.      The      respondent      no.2,           has     tried         to<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:07:14 :::<\/span>
\n                                    8<\/span><\/p>\n
      stretch the act of the applicant-Smt.Manisha<\/p>\n
      in   such    a    way   that       she      is      unnecessarily<\/p>\n
      harassed. Her only fault could be of turning<\/p>\n
      volte face and join the brothers instead of<\/p>\n
      other three sisters.\n<\/p>\n
    9.In   this     view      of       the     matter,           both          the<\/p>\n
      applications are allowed.                 The criminal cases<\/p>\n
      against     the   applicants           which     were        described<\/p>\n
      earlier and are pending on the file of the<\/p>\n
      Judicial Magistrate, are hereby quashed.\n<\/p>\n
                                             (V.R.KIN GAONKAR, J.)<\/p>\n
                                                 ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:07:14 :::<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009 Bench: V.R. Kingaonkar 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5336 OF 2003 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5337 OF 2003 1.Manisha Manohar Gokhale, Age 50 yrs. Occ.Housewife 2.Manohar Purshotam Gokhale, Age 55 yrs. Occ. Nil. […]<\/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-145324","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nManisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 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\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-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=\"2009-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-14T16:37:45+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-14T16:37:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":944,\"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\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-14T16:37:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 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":"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 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\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-14T16:37:45+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-14T16:37:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009"},"wordCount":944,"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\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009","name":"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-14T16:37:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manisha-manohar-gokhale-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-25-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Manisha Manohar Gokhale vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 September, 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\/145324","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=145324"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/145324\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=145324"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=145324"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=145324"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}