Bombay High Court
CP/546/2026 of Priyankat Kondiram Sontakke Vs Shri Balu Rusturm Kharat on 9 October 2026
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 2 CONT. PETITION NO. 536 OF 2026 IN WP/5790/2025 Kamina Sambhaji Sanap Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________ • Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner. • Mr.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 2 CONT. PETITION NO. 536 OF 2026 IN WP/5790/2025 Kamina Sambhaji Sanap Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. Govind K. Kulkarni, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 3 CONT. PETITION NO. 544 OF 2026 IN WP/5906/2025 Avinash Shri.ram Atole Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________ AND 4 CONT. PETITION NO. 545 OF 2026 IN WP/5914/2025 Anita Sheshrao Ingle Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. S. J. Salgare, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 5 CONT. PETITION NO. 546 OF 2026 IN WP/5907/2025 Priyankat Kondiram Sontakke
2026:BHC-AUG:48905-DB
2 to 24 Versus Shri. Balu Rusturm Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Ms. M. N. Ghanekar, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 6 CONT. PETITION NO. 547 OF 2026 IN WP/5910/2025 Hemlata Laxman Aher Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________ AND 7 CONT. PETITION NO. 548 OF 2026 IN WP/5788/2025 Chetan Nanasaheb Chavan Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. Rajdeep D. Raut, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 8 CONT. PETITION NO. 549 OF 2026 IN WP/5782/2025 Pooja Ganesh Atole Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________
AND 9 CONT. PETITION NO. 550 OF 2026 IN WP/5801/2025 Varsha Narayan Musale Versus Shri. Balu Rusturm Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Ms. M. N. Ghanekar, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 10 CONT. PETITION NO. 551 OF 2026 IN WP/5873/2025 Manisha Eknath Bade Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________ AND 11 CONT. PETITION NO. 552 OF 2026 IN WP/5861/2025 Sneha Shivajirao Gange Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. Rajdeep D. Raut, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 12 CONT. PETITION NO. 553 OF 2026 IN WP/5784/2025 Rajesh Gangadhar Shingare Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat
__________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. S. J. Salgare, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 13 CONT. PETITION NO. 554 OF 2026 IN WP/5916/2025 Rushikesh Dattatray Gadekar Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________ AND 14 CONT. PETITION NO. 555 OF 2026 IN WP/5909/2025 Yeshpal Nayabrao Gadhave Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. Govind K. Kulkarni, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 15 CONT. PETITION NO. 556 OF 2026 IN WP/5800/2025 Krushna Bhausaheb Khade Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________ AND 16 CONT. PETITION NO. 557 OF 2026 IN WP/5783/2025
Vijaymala Maroti Bhurke Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. S. J. Salgare, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 17 CONT. PETITION NO. 558 OF 2026 IN WP/5879/2025 Smt. Silja K. Siby Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________ AND 18 CONT. PETITION NO. 559 OF 2026 IN WP/5876/2025 Quadri Abdul Waseem Abdul Jaleel Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. Govind K. Kulkarni, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 19 CONT. PETITION NO. 560 OF 2026 IN WP/5912/2025 Yuvraj Dilip Nagargoje Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________
AND 20 CONT. PETITION NO. 561 OF 2026 IN WP/5875/2025 Rahul Eknathrao Bahire Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. S. J. Salgare, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 21 CONT. PETITION NO. 562 OF 2026 IN WP/5793/2025 Sopan Eknath Sangule Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________ AND 22 CONT. PETITION NO. 563 OF 2026 IN WP/5802/2025 Sonali Dnyaneshwar Chaudhari Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. Govind K. Kulkarni, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 23 CONT. PETITION NO. 564 OF 2026 IN WP/5789/2025 Yogesh Ganesh Kute Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat
__________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
• Mr. Rajdeep D. Raut, AGP for the Respondents. __________________________________________________________ AND 24 CONT. PETITION NO. 565 OF 2026 IN WP/5796/2025 Swati Bapusaheb Mirkad Versus Shri. Balu Rustum Kharat __________________________________________________________
• Mr. Tukaram Maruti Venjane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
__________________________________________________________ CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 09, 2026 PER COURT :
Not on board. Upon mentioning, taken on board.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, submits that order under contempt is complied with.
In view of the same, nothing survives in the present contempt petitions and the same are disposed of. (VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV) JUDGE (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE