Sabina New WP Challenging Vacation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. ……………… OF 2022.
SABINA LAKDAWALA …PETITIONERS

VERSUS
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE,
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY & ORS. …RESPONDENTS
INDEX
Sr. Page
Particulars No.
No.
1. Proforma I-III
2. Synopsis A-C
3. Memorandum of Petition
4. Vakalatnama
5. Memorandum of Registered Address
6. List of documents
7. EXHIBIT- “A”:-
The Order dated 21.01.2022 of division bench
of High Court to direct the Magistrate to hear
and pass orders on the Petitioner’s application
for ad interim relief within a period of one
month.
8. EXHIBIT- “B”
A chart of the various dates on which the
Petitioner’s case was listed, heard, or
adjourned for want of time, across the various
forums.
18. Affidavit in Support
19. Advocate Certificate

NEDUMPARA & NEDUMPARA
Advocates for the
Petitioners
9820535428/9447165650

VERSUS
PROFORMA
------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of ]Court or
Judge’sCoram appearance, Court’s order or ] orders
Direction and Prothonotary’s order ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of ] Court or
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of ] Court or
------------------------------------------------------------------

VERSUS
SYNOPSIS
CHALLENGE IN BRIEF:
The Petitioner is aggrieved, nay heartbroken and shocked by

the very thought of the Bombay High Court literally being shut down
for almost 3 weeks for Diwali vacation, at time when the Court had
failed to, for want of time being overburdened by long pendency to
render justice to the Petitioner, widow despite her having rigorously
pursued her cause and her case being listed or mentioned for not less
than 158 days since she was ousted from her home on 4th July 2021.
The Petitioner challenges the long vacation for which the
Hon’ble High Court will be locked down, with just insufficient number
Hon’ble Justices to hear the emergent cases, affecting her right to seek
justice within reasonable time. At any rate the long vacations that are
relic of the colonial era has to greater extent contributed in the further
collapse of the justice delivery system that is already on the
ventilation. The long vacation suits the convenience of elite lawyers, a
microscopic minority.
The Petitioner is a widow, who has since her being dragged out
of her house in the wee hours of 04.07.2021 by her in-laws particularly
her step son, step daughter and her step grandchildren with help and
support of political connections and local police station is awaiting for
some kind of relief. One of the major reason that has contributed to
her sorry plight and helplessness in which she is today is due the
deliberate and non-judicious stance taken by those who are entrusted
with the duty and responsibility to secure justice to the Petitioner and
her ilk. The locking of Courts in the name of vacation renders
infringement of rights particularly fundamental rights as in the case
of instant Petitioner, whose life and limbs are at risk and nugatory.
Hence, this Petition.
Dates & Events
Sr. Date Events Ex. Pg.

No. No.
1. 25.10.2021 On 25.10.2021 the petitioner filed

an application under section
12 of the DV Act and sought ex-
Parte orders against her in-laws.
2. 26.10.2021 The Petitioner’s lawyer argued the
matter exhaustively and the case was
adjourned for orders to 30.10.2021.
3. 30.10.2021 On 30.10.2021, the Petitioner was told

that the Respondent has left for Diwali
holidays without passing any orders.
4 15.11.2021 On 15.11.2021, the case was adjourned to
23.11.2021 and then to 24.11.2021. After
a series of adjournments, the case was
finally listed on 03.12.2021
5. 30.10.2021 On 30.10.2021, the Petitioner was told
that the Respondent has left for the
Diwali holidays without passing any
orders.
6 14.12.2021 This Hon’ble High Court by its order
dated 14.12.2021 directed the
Respondent to hear plea for
advancement sympathetically,
considering that she has been thrown
out of home.
There are three writ petitions and a suit
which the Petitioner has instituted
pending before this Court. The
Petitioner, as aforesaid, has been in the
Court and at her lawyer’s office for last
one and half years
Hence the instant Petition
Points to be urged: At the time of hearing
A) Acts to be relied upon:

1. Constitution of India;
2. Civil Procedure Code;
3. Domestic Violence Act;
4. Any other Acts.
Authorities to be cited: All at the time of arguments
Date : 19.10.2022
Place: Mumbai

Advocates for the Petitioners
DIST : MUMBAI
In the matter of Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India;
SABINA LAKDAWALA
W/o. Late Yousuf M. Lakdawala
Flat No.14,15, Sunflower Building,
Carter Road, Bandra West,
Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400050 …Petitioner
Versus
1. THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE,

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
Fort, Mumbai
Maharashtra- 400032
2. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Represented by Chief Secretary,
CS Office Main Building,
Mantralaya, 6th Floor,
Madame Cama Road, Mumbai-400032.
3. UNION OF INDIA
Represented by the Secretary in the
Department of Woman and Child Welfare
Shastri Bhavan New Delhi.
4. MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

Represented by the Secretary,
Department of Legal affairs,
3rd floor, ‘C’ Wing, Lok Nayak Bhawan,
Khan Market, New Delhi- 110003
5. MAHARASHTRA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Represented by its Chairman,
9, Hazarimal Somani Marg,
Opp. CSMT Station, Mumabi-400001
6. NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Manav Adhikar Bhawan,
Block-C, GPO Complex,
New Delhi - 110023
7. MAHARASHTRA STATE COMMISSION

FOR WOMAN
Gruhnirman Bhavan, Mezanin Floor,
Bandra (East), Mumbai
Maharashtra- 400051
8. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR WOMEN

Plot-21, Jasola Institutional Area,
New Delhi – 110025
9. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area,
Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi – 110 002
10. KOMAL SINGH RAJPUT

12th Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bandra, Mumbai 400050.
11. FEROZE Y. LAKDAWALA

S/o Yusuf LakdawalaAged 45 years
14/15, Sunflower Bldgs.,
27 – B Carter Road, Bandra West,
Mumbai 400 050.
12. THE REGISTRAR,

Supreme Court of India,
Tilak Marg, New Delhi-1100 …Respondents
TO,
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF
JUSTICE AND THE OTHER
HONOURABLE PUSINE
JUDGES OF THIS HONOURABLE

COURT
HUMBLE PETITION OF THE

PETTITIONER ABOVENAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

1. The Petitioner is a resident of Mumbai and a citizen of India. The
instant petition is instituted for the enforcement of her
fundamental rights.
2. The legal status of the Respondents are manifest from the very
cause title and requires no elaboration. They are necessary, if
not, proper parties to the instant petition in as much as without
their presence the instant petition cannot be adjudicated in a just
and equitable manner. The Petitioner has made repeated
references to the injustice caused to her by her in-laws,
particularly, her stepson and step daughter-in-law and Ld.
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra. The principles of natural
justice, therefore, requires that they be arrayed as parties.
3. The Petitioner, who was a housewife and now widow, was for the
first time, constrained to institute a suit in June 2021 being
alerted of the clandestine efforts on the part of her in-laws to
alienate the estates of her husband who was then terminally ill
and in judicial custody. The institution of the suit enraged her in-
laws, and they brutally attacked the Petitioner on the midnight
of 03.07.2021. Her in-laws, using their political and bureaucratic
connections, got her arrested on the false charge that she threw
a glass vase at her daughter-in-law and seriously injured her. Her
step daughter-in-law had suffered a minor injury during the
scuffle that ensued while she and the other in-laws attacked the
Petitioner. The Petitioner was booked under Section 326 of IPC,
a non-bailable offence on the premise that the simple injuries
which she suffered was grievous hurt. She approached the
Sessions Court for anticipatory bail and the High Court for
quashing of the FIR. This was during the covid pandemic when
there was no open Court hearing. She repeatedly moved
praecipes (application for urgent hearing), but no hearing was
granted until her lawyer, making an exemption from the covid-
19 protocol, sought an audience with the Hon’ble judge in his
chambers.
4. The Petitioner could not go to her home fearing threat to her life.
She approached the Police and eventually the High Court. The
High Court relegated her to the Police officer concerned and
relief was declined on the ground that an FIR was pending
against her. It took her more than 3 months, namely, 12.10.2021
for relief that she shall not be arrested, the injury she was alleged
to have committed being a simple injury falling under Section
323 which was non-cognizable and bailable.
5. On being protected from illegal arrest, the Petitioner sought

police protection at the hands of this Hon’ble Court to enter her
matrimonial home. This Court relegated the Petitioner to the
Magistrate under the D.V Act. Section 23 of the D.V Act
empowers the Magistrate to pass ex parte orders, access to the
shared household, protection to her body and belongings and her
other legal rights. The D.V Act is an all-comprehensive
legislation making it obligatory on the part of the Magistrates to
grant protection to women facing domestic violence. The
Magistrate is expected, and duty bound to grant immediate
relief, even ex parte. However, the Magistrate who heard the
Petitioner’s application for ex parte relief went on long leave, to
be exact from 30.10.2021, the day the matter was kept for orders,
without passing any orders. Aggrieved by the Magistrate’s
conduct and seeking urgent reliefs, the Petitioner approached
the High Court. This was during the Diwali holidays, 2021.
6. To the Petitioner’s dismay, the Petitioner learned that the High
Court was closed for vacation from 31.10.2021 to 14.11.2022 and
that the Registry would not entertain any petition without the
leave of the vacation judge. The vacation bench does not sit every
day. After a herculean task spanning over days, the Petitioner
was able to get her petition listed and the High Court by its order
dated 03.11.2021 disposed of her petition directing the
Magistrate to pass an order on or before 10.11.2021. The
Petitioner making a grievance about the conduct of the
Magistrate in going on leave without passing orders, apparently
irked the Ld. Magistrate. He rejected the Petitioner’s plea for ex
parte reliefs and ordered notice to the opposite parties for
hearing on the question of interim protection.
7. The Ld. Magistrate on the date on which the case was scheduled
once again was on long leave. The Petitioner’s insistence that her
petition for ad interim protection be heard and appropriate
orders be passed, was received with great hostility by the
Magistrate. He accordingly dismissed the application for interim
relief after issuing notice to her in-laws and after them being
represented by their lawyer, without uttering a word on the
merits of the case. This strange conduct on the part of the
Magistrate left the Petitioner with no other option than to invoke
the jurisdiction of this Court once again by way of W.P no. 687
of 2022. A division bench of this Hon’ble Court by order dated
21.01.2022 was pleased to direct the Magistrate to hear and pass
orders on the Petitioner’s application for ad interim relief within
a period of one month. A copy of the order of this Court is
produced as Exhibit “A”.
8. The Petitioner was dragged out of her home, having barely

changed out of her night garments which were torn by her in-
laws, in the wee hours of 3rd July 2021. Since then, she had quite
literally come to Court every single day. Even after the lapse of
almost 7 months she had not received any relief, except that she
shall not be arrested, and which too came later than she would
have hoped, and a further direction to the Magistrate to pass
orders on her interim application.
9. It is not out of place to mention here that during the Christmas

vacation as well, the Petitioner had approached the vacation
bench of this Court. But her plea was not entertained pointing
out that no new cause of action has arisen during the vacation
and that therefore she shall wait till the reopening of the Court.
10. The Ld. Magistrate, eventually, by order dated 23.02.2022,

granted her some namesake ad interim relief. Placing a great
amount of faith in this Hon’ble Court despite all her bitter
experiences, and having no other choice, she sought relief
invoking this Court’s jurisdiction under Article 226 which led to
the appointment of a mediator. The mediation process failed
entirely due to the non-cooperation of the Petitioner’s in-laws
who attended only one single session that too after two whole
months, despite the Petitioner being present for every single
session that was arranged.
11. The Petitioner had sought, right from the beginning,

intervention at the hands of this Court by way of mediation and
by virtue of the remedies this Court is competent, and duty
bound to grant in the realm of public law, because of her
helplessness. Eventually, she was left with no option than to
institute a civil suit for partition and other remedies. It was once
again the mid-summer vacation. She could learn from her own
experience that the Court virtually restrains itself from
entertaining anything except those of extreme urgency, even a
week before closing for vacation. She, accordingly, sought urgent
hearing of the suit for ad interim relief during the vacation.
However, the Court declined hearing for ad interim reliefs but
was pleased to list the case for immediately after vacation. The
same meant the Petitioner being denied access to justice for 4-5
weeks.
12. To cut a long story short, it is now more than one year and 3
months since the Petitioner was dragged out of her home by the
police at the instance of her in-laws who enjoy enormous clout
and denied entry and residence in her matrimonial home. It has
been more than one year and one month since her husband who
was terminally ill breathed his last while in Arthur Road Jail. The
Petitioner is yet to get any relief from the Courts. She has been to
her lawyer’s office and the Court almost every day. Her case was
either on the list, mentioned or heard in the various forums, on
at the very least 160 days. Figures speaks better than words.
Accordingly, the Petitioner is annexing a chart of the various
dates on which the Petitioner’s case was listed, heard or
adjourned for want of time, across the various forums. A copy of
the said chart is produced as Exhibit “B”.
13. Seeking listing of the suit, the Petitioner was literally before this
Court every day in the months of June, July, and August.
However, despite the case being high on board, it was never
taken up or heard, though the Hon’ble Court had always been
pleased and considerate to assure the Petitioner’s counsel that
the case would be heard. One of the Petitioner’s writ petitions
which was before the division bench of this Court, though was
listed high on board, was hardly ever taken because there were
ever so many petitions listed as high on board, acceding to the
plea of the advocates concerned. The order of the Magistrate was
taken in appeal by the Petitioner, so too, her in-laws, and it took
4 months for it to be finally heard and finally disposed, despite
the Petitioner’s counsel pressing for urgent hearing practically
every other day. There are three writ petitions and a suit which
the Petitioner has instituted pending before this Court. The
Petitioner, as aforesaid, has been in the Court and at her lawyer’s
office literally every other day because she is in a state of distress
and has no other option than to desperately pursue the case
which she has instituted.
14. In short, the Petitioner can say from her experience that the
justice delivery system in in dire straits. It is time that every
possible avenue is explored and implemented to ensure that
litigants are rendered, their cases are heard, and they are not
allowed to bleed and die. The first thing, the Petitioner in all
humility believes, is to abandon the closure of courts in the name
of vacation, relic of the colonial era which we mechanically and
mindlessly follow. Court vacation, a relic of our colonial past, the
Petitioner is made to understand, was justified at a time when
majority of the judges were Englishmen who were not adjusted
to the extreme summers of India, and they needed long vacations
to travel by sea to England. It was a necessity then, today, it is a
luxury that the country can ill afford.
15. Like any other institution or industry providing service, Courts

concerned with the lives, liberties and properties of the citizens,
should be available at all times and in the background of the
unthinkable backlog of cases, which is still worse now due to the
covid pandemic, it is time that the Courts function 365 days,
excluding weekends, national holidays. Judges undoubtedly are
overburdened, they need a break, so too lawyers. But the
requisite break for lawyers and judges can be provided without
the entire institution being shut down. So far as the Supreme
Court is concerned, there is a vacation officer whom one could
contact and seek a hearing during the vacation. So far as the
Bombay High Court is concerned, there is no vacation officer,
there is no one available except the associate of the vacation
bench concerned. The Registry is closed. No petitions are
accepted without the express orders of the vacation judge
concerned.
16. It is unbelievable that this practice, a relic of the colonial rule has
been continued without any serious questions being raised for
the last 75 years since independence. The Petitioner deems it her
bounden duty to institute the instant petition seeking
abolishment of the system of vacation altogether as a person
aggrieved, a victim of the shortcomings of justice delivery system
which is on ventilator. In an ideal system, as is the case with some
High Courts, a petition once instituted would be listed for
hearing automatically, as a matter of duty on the part of the
Registry and equally as a matter of right vested in a litigant. So
far as the Bombay High Court is concerned, the litigant enjoys no
such right. He/his lawyer is required to move a praecipe,
convince the Court of the urgency and then alone the petition is
listed. But even when a case is listed, with a change in the roster,
the case is once again out of the radar. It has to be mentioned
once again and allowed to be listed once again.
17. Lawyers and litigants residing far travel for over 2-3 hours only
for the purpose of mentioning, for a date for their case to be
heard. This is a wholly avoidable burden. Precious time of the
Court is also lost, in as much as mentioning on an average takes
20-30mins. It is no exaggeration to state, for the Petitioner has
witnessed with her own eyes, that the whole day was spend on
mentioning, the cases being mentioned being heard, and the
entire board remaining to be heard. These are all avoidable man-
made miseries.
18. Instead of the Courts being shut down during the entire duration
of the Diwali, Christmas and midsummer holidays, it should be
kept open at least at half the usual strength. For us Indians,
festivals like Diwali, Christmas etc. are sacrosanct. A section of
the judges and lawyers may insist that they be allowed to take
leave. But it is certainly not the case that every lawyer and every
judge want to take two- and three-week long breaks. For the time
being, respecting the views of the section of the bench and the
bar that bat for vacation, instead of the current practice of two or
three judges being appointed as vacation benches, the Courts be
made to work at least with 50 percent capacity and eventually in
the near future the Courts working at full strength.
19. The Petitioner is not contending that vacation be denied to

judges and lawyers and their workload be increased. Judges can
be encouraged to take leave at different times of the year.
20. The Petitioner can speak from her experience that our entire
justice delivery system, is insensitive and prejudicial to the plight
of widows and women who are subjected to domestic violence,
deprivation and even de facto destitution. It may appear to be a
sweeping statement, but unfortunately, that has been the
experience of the Petitioner. Even lady presiding officers were
equally unsympathetic to victims of domestic violence and
widows, as their male counterparts. The Petitioner is made to
understand that there are institutions/mechanism for in-service
training of subordinate judicial officers, though no such
mechanism exists in the case of higher judiciary.
21. The Petitioner can certainly vouch that the extremely bitter
experience she had to undergo at the hands of the Magistrate and
even the Appellate authority, the Sessions Court, indicate that
the training imparted is far from adequate, at least in the matter
of sensitivity towards the rights of women, nay, the victims of
domestic violence and abuse, widows in particular. There are
thousands and thousands of women abandoned by husbands
and their in-laws, waiting for years on end for even for ad interim
protection. It is unfortunate that the State and National women’s
commissions, the Ministry of Women and Child Development at
the Centre as well as in the States, National Human Rights
Commission, so too, state human rights commissions have
totally failed to address themselves to the problems which
women who seek enforcement of their rights under the Domestic
Violence Act and similar laws, are subjected to.
22. The undeniable ground reality is that nothing beyond lip service
is done when it comes to the enforcement of the tights of women,
particularly those subjected to domestic violence. Be it the
judiciary or the police, the patriarchal mindset is so deep rooted
that the various legislations for the empowerment of women,
even today, only exists on paper. The injustice and suffering
which the Petitioner has been made to undergo ever since she
was dragged out of her house by the police on a false accusation
at the hands of her in-laws makes the Petitioner feel so strongly
that she should whatever she can, contribute her little mite,
towards the cause of other widows and women who are denied
justice and treated unfairly in the temples of justice.
23. As could be evidenced from the enclosed chart (Exhibit B) in the

last less than one year and four months, the Petitioner has
attended the Court not less than 158 days. Yet, the relief, the
enforcement of the legitimate rights which the justice delivery
system should unfailingly make available to her, continues to be
a mirage, reminding one of Shakespeare's words "justice feasts
while the widow weeps". The Petitioner's partition suit is
pending before a Single Judge of this Court, so too, the various
other proceedings instituted by her for the enforcement of her
rights, the most primordial of them being the one for the security
of her life and limbs. Hence the instant writ petition.
GROUNDS
Grounds in support of the relief sought for are fairly elaborated

in the statement of facts above andhence are not repeated. The
Petitioners respectfully submit that the paragraphs 1 to 23
hereinabove may be read and treated as the ground in support of
the instant Writ Petition.
24. The Petitioner craves leave of this Hon’ble Court to add, alter,
amend and/or modify any of the aforesaid grounds as and when
required.
25. No other petition in respect of the subject- matter of this Writ

Petition has been filed either in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India or in this Hon’ble High Court.
26. The Petitioner states that requisite Court-fee as per Rules has
been paid.
27. The Petitioner states that she will rely upon a listof Documents, a
list whereof is annexed hereto.
28. The Petitioner states that no other efficacious alternate remedy is

available to the Petitioner than to file the instant Writ Petition
29. The Petitioner states that the cause of action arose in Mumbai
and hence this Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain this
writ petition.
FOR THE REASONS STATED HEREINABOVE AND

THOSETO BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT
IS MOST HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THIS HON’BLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:
a) To declare that the closing of the Courts for long vacations

during Diwali, Christmas and summer, altogether for more
than 70 days, amounts to violation of the fundamental
rights of the Petitioner and litigants similarly placed,
because it compounds to the problem of the inability of the
Courts to hear cases due to paucity of time and further that
such practice of long vacations is liable to be brought to an
end;
b) Without prejudice to relief (a) above, to issue a writ in the

nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
direction or order directing the Respondents to make the
Hon’ble High Court of Judicature of Bombay fully
functional in the ensuing Diwali vacations by appointing
adequate number of judges to hear and adjudicate all cases
of urgent nature and further direct the Registry to receive
on file all petitions which are filed during vacation without
insisting upon the permission of the vacation bench
concerned
c) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, directing Respondent
no. 1 to make arrangements for hearing applications and
petitions of widows, destitute, and the like who require
precedence of hearing over others so that justice is not
denied to the hapless and most disadvantaged sections of
society
d) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other

writ, order or direction, directing the Central and State
Governments and all others concerned to bring into
existence a mechanism whereby the cases instituted by
women who are victims of domestic violence, particularly
widows, are taken up, if possible by specially designated
courts/benches, and be disposed of expeditiously.
INTERIM ORDER BY IF ANY PRAYED FOR:
a. Pending final disposal of the above writ petition, the

Respondent, the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court of
Judicature at Bombay, be directed to constitute/nominate
adequate number of benches/judges to hear all cases,
which require emergent hearing nay even final disposal
and particularly of concerning the rights of the women, nay
widows and destitute, like the Petitioner.
Advocates for the Petitioners Petitioners
NEDUMPARA & NEDUMPARA ADVOCATES

VERIFICATION
I, Sabina Lakdawala, w/o Yusuf Lakdawala aged

…. years Indian Inhabitant having address at Flat 14,15 Sunflower
Building Carter Rd, Bandra West, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400050
do hereby solemnly declare thatwhat is stated in paragraphs 1 to
28 of the foregoing writ are true to my own knowledge and belief
and what is stated in the remaining paragraphs 29 to 34 are based
on information whichI believe to be true and correct.
Solemnly declared at Mumbai]

this ….. day of October, 2022]
Petitioner before Me

Advocates for the Petitioner
Mob No. 9447165650/9820535428
Email id : nedumparaassociates@gmail.com
marianedumpara@gmail.com
I am not a member of the Advocate’s Welfare fund hence the
stamp of Rs. 2 is not affixed
Advocate
SABINA LAKDAWALA
W/o. Late Yousuf M. Lakdawala
Flat No.14,15, Sunflower Building,
Carter Road, Bandra West,
Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400050 …Petitioner
Versus
1. THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE,

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
Fort, Mumbai
Maharashtra- 400032
2. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Represented by Chief Secretary,
CS Office Main Building,
Mantralaya, 6th Floor,
Madame Cama Road, Mumbai-400032.
3. UNION OF INDIA
Represented by the Secretary in the
Department of Woman and Child Welfare
Shastri Bhavan New Delhi.
4. MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

Represented by the Secretary,
Department of Legal affairs,
3rd floor, ‘C’ Wing, Lok Nayak Bhawan,
Khan Market, New Delhi- 110003
5. MAHARASHTRA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

9, Hazarimal Somani Marg,
Opp. CSMT Station, Mumabi-400001
6. NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Manav Adhikar Bhawan,
Block-C, GPO Complex,
New Delhi - 110023
7. MAHARASHTRA STATE COMMISSION

FOR WOMAN
Gruhnirman Bhavan, Mezanin Floor,
Bandra (East), Mumbai
Maharashtra- 400051
8. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR WOMEN

Plot-21, Jasola Institutional Area,
New Delhi – 110025
9. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area,
Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi – 110 002
10. KOMAL SINGH RAJPUT

12th Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bandra, Mumbai 400050.
11. FEROZE Y. LAKDAWALA

S/o Yusuf LakdawalaAged 45 years
14/15, Sunflower Bldg,
27 – B Carter Road, Bandra West,
Mumbai 400 050.
12. THE REGISTRAR,

Supreme Court of India,
Tilak Marg, New Delhi-1100 …Respondents
To
The Prothonotary & Senior Master (O.S),
High Court of Judicature at Bombay
Mumbai - 400 032.
Sir,
I, Sabina Lakdawala, the Petitioner, do hereby
appoint Nedumpara & Nedumpara, Advocates to act,
appear and plead for me in the above matter.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have set and subscribed my hand to
this writing at Mumbai.
Dated this __ day of October, 2022.
Accepted Petitioner

Advocates for Petitioner
101, Gundecha Chambers, Fort,
Mumbai- 400 001
nedumparaasociates@gmail.com,
marianedumpara@gmail.com,
9447165650

VERSUS
AFFIDAVIT
I, Sabina Lakdawala ,the Petitioner abovenamed having address
at Flat 14,15 Sunflower Building Carter Rd, BandraWest, Mumbai,
Maharashtra 400050, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as
follows:-
1. That I am the Petitioner in the accompanying Writ Petition
filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India. I am
fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the
case and, hence, competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That, the accompanying Writ Petition has been drafted by
my Counsel on my instructions. I have read and understood
the contents of the same which are true and correct to my
knowledge and belief. No fact of it is false and nothing
material has been concealed therefrom.

3. That, the Annexures filed along with the Writ Petition are
the true and correct copies of their respective originals.
Solemnly affirmed at Mumbai ]

on this ___ day of October 2022 ]
Deponent

NEDUMPARA AND NEDUMPARA, ADVOCATES

VERSUS
MEMORANDUM OF REGISTERED ADDRESS

Advocates for Petitioner
Mumbai- 400 001
9447165650

VERSUS
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
1. Documents and Exhibits referred to and relied upon in the

Petition.
2. Documents annexed to this Petition.
3. Any other documents.
Advocate for Petitioner


VERSUS
To,
The Prothonotary and Senior Master (O.S),
High Court of Judicature at Bombay
MUMBAI 400 032.
ADVOCATE’S CERTIFICATE
We, Nedumpara and Nedumpara, Advocates for the Petitioner, do
hereby state that the above matter is required to be considered by
a Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court under Rule 636(1)(b) of the
High Court (OriginalSide) Rules.
Dated this day of October, 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE
AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL
JURISDICTION
Sabina Lakdawala …Petitioners

Versus
The Hon’ble Chief Justice,
High Court of Bombay & Ors.
…Respondents
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF WRIT

PETITION

Mumbai- 400 001
9447165650
AT BOMBAY
JURISDICTION

Versus
…Respondents
WRIT PETITION

Mumbai- 400 001
9447165650
AT BOMBAY
JURISDICTION

Versus
…Respondents
VAKALATNAMA

Mumbai- 400 001
9447165650

Sabina New WP Challenging Vacation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sabina New WP Challenging Vacation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. ……………… OF 2022.

SABINA LAKDAWALA …PETITIONERS

18. Affidavit in Support

19. Advocate Certificate

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. ……………… OF 2022.

SABINA LAKDAWALA …PETITIONERS

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. ……………… OF 2022.

SABINA LAKDAWALA …PETITIONERS

The Petitioner is aggrieved, nay heartbroken and shocked by

Dates & Events

Sr. Date Events Ex. Pg.

1. 25.10.2021 On 25.10.2021 the petitioner filed

3. 30.10.2021 On 30.10.2021, the Petitioner was told

Points to be urged: At the time of hearing

A) Acts to be relied upon:

Authorities to be cited: All at the time of arguments

NEDUMPARA & NEDUMPARA

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. ……………… OF 2022.

In the matter of Articles 226 and 227

of the Constitution of India;

1. THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE,

4. MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

5. MAHARASHTRA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

6. NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

7. MAHARASHTRA STATE COMMISSION

8. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR WOMEN

10. KOMAL SINGH RAJPUT

11. FEROZE Y. LAKDAWALA

12. THE REGISTRAR,

JUDGES OF THIS HONOURABLE

HUMBLE PETITION OF THE

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

5. On being protected from illegal arrest, the Petitioner sought

8. The Petitioner was dragged out of her home, having barely

9. It is not out of place to mention here that during the Christmas

10. The Ld. Magistrate, eventually, by order dated 23.02.2022,

11. The Petitioner had sought, right from the beginning,

15. Like any other institution or industry providing service, Courts

19. The Petitioner is not contending that vacation be denied to

23. As could be evidenced from the enclosed chart (Exhibit B) in the

Grounds in support of the relief sought for are fairly elaborated

25. No other petition in respect of the subject- matter of this Writ

28. The Petitioner states that no other efficacious alternate remedy is

FOR THE REASONS STATED HEREINABOVE AND

a) To declare that the closing of the Courts for long vacations

b) Without prejudice to relief (a) above, to issue a writ in the

d) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other

INTERIM ORDER BY IF ANY PRAYED FOR:

a. Pending final disposal of the above writ petition, the

Advocates for the Petitioners Petitioners

NEDUMPARA & NEDUMPARA ADVOCATES

I, Sabina Lakdawala, w/o Yusuf Lakdawala aged

Solemnly declared at Mumbai]

NEDUMPARA & NEDUMPARA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. ……………… OF 2022.

1. THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE,