1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.272 OF 2006 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.272 OF 2006 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.272 OF 2006 IN IN IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.938 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.938 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.938 OF 2005 M/s.Globe Tex-Creation : Petitioner. versus The State of Maharashtra : Respondent. WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.273 OF 2006 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.273 OF 2006 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.273 OF 2006 IN IN IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.935 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.935 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.935 OF 2005 M/s.Flair Clothing Fashions : Petitioner. versus The State of Maharashtra : Respondent. WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.274 OF 2006 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.274 OF 2006 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.274 OF 2006 IN IN IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.937 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.937 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.937 OF 2005 M/s.Ambiance Impex : Petitioner. versus 2 2 2 The State of Maharashtra : Respondent. WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.275 OF 2006 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.275 OF 2006 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.275 OF 2006 IN IN IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.936 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.936 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.936 OF 2005 M/s.Preyanka Creations : Petitioner. versus The Stateof Maharashtra. : Respondent. Mr.Q.A.Siddiqui & Mr.J.R.Khan for the petitioner. Mrs.A.S.Pai, APP, for the State. CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE S.A.BOBDE, JJ. S.A.BOBDE, JJ. S.A.BOBDE, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 04, 2006. DATED : AUGUST 04, 2006. DATED : AUGUST 04, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel Mr.Siddiqui, appearing for the petitioner and, learned APP Mrs.Pai appearing for the State. 2. Leave to amend the applications is 3 3 3 granted i.e. to delete Respondent No.2 ICICI Bank from all the applications. Mr.Siddiqui appearing for the petitioner undertakes to carry out the amendment during the course of day. 3. The grievance of the applicant is that by our order dated 8th June 2006 we gave him an opportunity to move the lower Court for return of his property and, when in fact, he has filed his written submissions, opposing the application filed by the applicant/bank there, he prayed that he may be allowed to operate bank account as per Para 35 of the judgment of lower Court. His case was not at all independently considered though the judge has ultimately rejected the application filed by the ICICI Bank by order dated 29.6.2006. 4. Since we have already disposed of all the petitions filed by the petitioner by our order dated 8th June 2006, nothing was pending before us. Since in the written submissions the applicant had made a claim that he may be permitted to operate bank account, we give liberty to the applicants to apply again to the lower Court for all the reliefs pertaining to the bank account and the lower court will decide the 4 4 4 same without being influenced by its own earlier order dated 29th June 2006 passed against the ICICI bank, after hearing all the concerned parties on its own merits. All the present Applications are disposed of. [D.G.DESHPANDE,J] [D.G.DESHPANDE,J] [D.G.DESHPANDE,J] [S.A.BOBDE, J] [S.A.BOBDE, J] [S.A.BOBDE, J]