1 wp357910 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3579 OF 2010 Anant Laxman Jangam & Ors. ...Petitioners VERSUS State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. V.S. Talkute for the Petitioners Mr. H.J. Dedhia, A.P.P., for the State CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATE: 16TH DECEMBER, 2010 P.C.:- Heard counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. 2. We are in agreement with the criticism made by the petitioners that the impugned decision has been taken by the Executive Magistrate, Chiplun, dated 10th December, 2010, without considering the possibility of some alternative arrangement, including to provide sufficient security during the relevant period when the puja is scheduled to be performed as per the programme at page 24 of the 2 wp357910 paper book. The learned A.P.P., on instructions, in all fairness, states that such Puja (Saptah) is being performed for the last 5 years. Merely because one party has complained does not necessarily mean that the only option available to the Executive Magistrate was to invoke Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure so as to impose total prohibition of performing the puja (saptah) which is being carried on for the last 5 years by the residents of the nearby area. 3. Realising this position, the learned A.P.P. submits that in that case, the Executive Magistrate will re-consider the matter afresh and take appropriate decision and issue necessary instructions as may be required. That will be done by tomorrow. 4. Accordingly, the impugned decision is set aside with liberty to the Executive Magistrate to re-examine the entire issue afresh and pass appropriate orders or directions as may be warranted in the situation by tomorrow afternoon, 1.00 p.m. This indulgence is, however, shown on the assurance given by the petitioners that they and their agents, servants and representatives will abide by the directions to be given by the Executive Magistrate, and also observe reasonable time-limits for performing of puja and religious discourse. 3 wp357910 5. The fact that this order is set aside pre-supposes that the petitioners are free to carry on their scheduled activities, subject, however, to maintaining law and order situation and directions to be issued by local police and, as mentioned earlier, by the Executive Magistrate. 6. Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. A.P. BHANGALE, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.