HARSHADA H. SAWANT v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Arms Act, 1959 ss. 3, 25, 27
Judgment
Ms. Kiran Jadhav, Advocate i/by Randhir Kale for Applicant. .................... ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JANUARY 21, 2025 : P.C.
Mentioned. Not on Board. Taken on Board. Heard Ms. Jadhav, learned Advocate for Applicant. Perused the praecipe dated 21.01.2025 for Speaking to the Minutes of the order dated 20.01.2025.
Appearance clause of order dated 20.01.2025 be read as ‘Mr. Sudeep Pasbola, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Kochrekar, Ms. Kiran Jadhav, Mr. Shubham Kadam, Ms. Altiya Shaikh, Mr. Vishal Kolekar, Mr. Harsharaj Jagtap and Harshvardhan Patil, Advocates i/by Randhir Kale for Applicant’. As also in the entire order whereever there is mention about Advocate ‘Mr. Tapkire’, the same shall be read as ‘Mr. Pasbola’.
4.1. In line No.4 of paragraph No.2 order dated 20.01.2025, be read as ‘Crime No.544 of 2023’ instead of ‘Crime No.545 of 2023’ and 1 of 2 line No.7 of paragraph No.2 be read as ‘Sections 3, 25, 27 of Indian Arms Act, 1959’ instead of ‘Sections 325, 327 of Indian Arms Act, 1959’.
4.2. In line Nos.2, 4, 5 and 13 of paragraph No.9 of order dated
20.01.2025 ‘Accused No.5’ be read as ‘Accused No.2’.
Necessary corrections be carried out in the original order and corrected order be uploaded.
Praecipe is disposed. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT HANUMANT SAWANT 2 of 2
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arms Act, 1959 — ss. 3, 25, 27.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 21 Jan 2025. The bench was MILIND N JADHAV.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.