Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4608 (BOM)

VANDANA NANDKUMAR TASGAONKAR v. NANDKUMAR YADAVRAO TASGAONKAR AND 7 ORS

IA/5632/2025 · 2026-09-08

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 3 06-IA-5632-25-IN-WP-968-26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.5632 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.968 OF 2026 Vandana Nandkumar Tasgaonkar .... Applicant IN THE MATTER BETWEEN : Dr. Nandkumar Yadavrao Tasgaonkar & Anr. .... Petitioners versus Union of India & Ors. .... Respondents ….... • Mr. Akshay R. Kapadia a/w Mr. Kishor Lawate, Advocate for Applicant in IA/5632/2025. • Mr. S. K. Halwasia, Addl. P. P. a/w S. S. Halwasia, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2/Union of India. • Mr. Aditya Juvekar i/b. Jamshed Ansari, Advocate for Respondent No.6 in IA/5632/2025. • Mr. Hafeezur Rahman, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 to 5. • Mr. Kuldeep Patil a/w Ms. Sanika Joshi, Advocate for Respondent-CBI. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ. DATE : 08th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. : 1. This is an application for amendment in the Writ Petition No.968 of 2026. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that during pendency of the Petition, the Applicant Nesarikar MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Digitally signed by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date: 2026.09.11 12:14:26 +0530 2 / 3 06-IA-5632-25-IN-WP-968-26.odt i.e. the Petitioner No.2 in the original Petition, was dropped as an accused in the charge-sheet by the CBI. He therefore submitted that the this is a relevant factor which needs to be taken into account while considering the main Writ Petition. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the contesting Respondent Nos.3 to 5 submitted that the CBI’s investigation is still going on and therefore that statement may not be accurate. 3. We have considered these submissions. We see no reason to deny amendment to the Writ Petition. The contesting Respondents shall have right to file consolidated reply to the amended Petition and put forth their contention in the additional affidavit-in-reply. 4. Hence, the following order : O R D E R (i) The application is allowed. (ii) The Applicant is permitted to carry out the amendment in the main Petition as per the schedule in this application. 3 / 3 06-IA-5632-25-IN-WP-968-26.odt (iii) Amendment to be carried out within a period of three weeks from today. The amended Petition to be served on all the Respondents. (iv) The Respondent shall be at liberty to file additional affidavit-in-reply to the amended Petition. (v) The application is disposed of. (RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)