Bombay High Court
WP/1147/2021 of ARUN BABARAO KAJALE Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS on 8 October 2026
1147-21 . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 919 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1147 OF 2021 ARUN BABARAO KAJALE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Mr. Rathi Swapnil S., Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. G. A . Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State …. CORAM :
919 cri. wp 1147-21 .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
919 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1147 OF 2021
ARUN BABARAO KAJALE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Rathi Swapnil S., Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State ….
CORAM
:
SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.
Date
:
08/10/2026
PER COURT :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
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.
1. Heard.
2. Though the petition has been filed seeking quashing of the Gazette Notification dated 16.06.2017, whereby the property of the petitioner was attached in connection with the crime registered under the MPID Act, but the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, fairly submitted that the concerned Designated Court has taken cognizance of the matter and that the confirmation of the said Gazette Notification has not yet been made by the Designated Court.
3. On perusal of the provisions of the MPID Act, particularly sub- section (3) of Section 7 thereof, it appears that any person claiming an interest in the property attached, or any portion thereof, may VS Maind/ Page|1 2026:BHC-AUG:47627-DB
919 cri. wp 1147-21 . raise an objection before the Designated Court before an order is passed under sub-section (4) or sub-section (6) of Section 7.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submitted that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to approach the concerned Designated Court and raise an appropriate objection, particularly when the order confirming the Gazette Notification has not yet been passed.
5. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to raise an appropriate objection before the concerned Designated Court, in accordance with law. [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV] [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE] JUDGE JUDGE VS Maind/ Page|2