SHARDA NARAYAN BHONGADE Vs. SURENDRA JAGMOHAN PALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner had sent a letter dated 6-2-2002 to this Court which was converted into a criminal writ petition. Initially on 4-3-2002, the learned A. P. P. had taken two weeks time to take instructions in the said matter and an affidavit was filed on behalf of the Government on 16-3-2002. On 18-3-2002, Mrs. Maldhure, Advocate was appointed in this case to represent the petitioner and a direction was given to the office to supply all the relevant papers to the learned Advocate, Mrs. Maldhure, thereafter took instructions on behalf of the petitioner and filed an affidavit stating the grievances of the petitioner on oath which was solemnly affirmed on 5-4-2002. Thereafter, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and respondents were heard and Rule was granted in this petition and it was made returnable in the second week of June, 2002.

(2.) IN spite of the notice issued by this courts, the respondent No. 1 who is the concerned Police Officer and who had investigated the matter, did not remain present and, therefore, directions were given by this Court to the concerned Superintendent of Police to ensure that respondent No. 1 remains present on the next date before this Court. On 28-6-2002, respondents 3 and 4 were deleted as in fact they were not necessary parties in the petition and no relief was claimed against them. The matter was thereafter finally heard at length and we have heard the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also the respondents.

(3.) THE brief facts of the present case are as under : The petitioner has approached this Court by sending a letter which was converted into the Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is a housewife and she is residing at Manegaon (Bazar ). Tah. and Dist. Bhandara for the last 15 years with her family. Her husband Narayan Bhongade is working as Laboratory Assistant at a local School viz. Chaityanaya Vidyalaya, Manegaon (Bazar ). The case of the petitioner is that her family consisted of 8 persons which consists of 3 daughters, one son, husband and her mother-in-law and father-in-law and that salary of her husband is the only source of income on which she has to maintain her large family. The petitioner is a housewife and was not concerned at any time with any political activity or was never a worker any political party.