JAYASHREE NINAD THAKUR vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. — WP/2461/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226,14,21. Next hearing: 24th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM010229792026
Filing Number
WP/9573/2026
Filing Date
04-May-2026
Registration No
WP/2461/2026
Registration Date
05-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sarang Vijaykumar Kotwal , Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandesh Dadasaheb Patil
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sarang Vijaykumar Kotwal , Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandesh Dadasaheb Patil
Bench Type
Division
Category
CRIMINAL ( 9 )
Sub-Category
Seeking Directions ( 105 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JAYASHREE NINAD THAKUR
Adv. Sattyendra Muley
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
-
2.VASANT VIHAR APARTMENT CONDOMINIUM
Case History
-
24-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
24-Jun-2026
For Circulation
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sarang Vijaykumar Kotwal , Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandesh Dadasaheb Patil
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sarang Vijaykumar Kotwal,hon'ble Shri Justice Sandesh Dadasaheb PatilView PDF
Case Summary: WP/2461/2026 Jayashree Ninad Thakur v. State of Maharashtra & Vasant Vihar Apartment The Bombay High Court adjourned the writ petition to 24/06/2026. The court directed the APP to file an affidavit from the local police Senior Inspector detailing the exact dispute and ordered police to maintain peace. Critically, the court restrained Respondent No.2 (the apartment society) from obstructing essential amenities, including medical services, to the petitioner until the next hearing. Respondent No.2 was permitted to file a reply affidavit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
04-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP/2461/2026
Case Summary: WP/2461/2026 Jayashree Ninad Thakur v. State of Maharashtra & Vasant Vihar Apartment The Bombay High Court adjourned the writ petition to 24/06/2026. The court directed the APP to file an affidavit from the local police Senior Inspector detailing the exact dispute and ordered police to maintain peace. Critically, the court restrained Respondent No.2 (the apartment society) from obstructing essential amenities, including medical services, to the petitioner until the next hearing. Respondent No.2 was permitted to file a reply affidavit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts