The Ultimate Goal oF     

At Charlewar Associates, our mission is to protect the rights of individuals against arbitrary administrative decisions. In a recent matter, Riteshkumar s/o Rupchand Malgham vs. State of Maharashtra & Others (WP No. 3061/2025), our founding counsel Adv. Ishwar Charlewar represented the petitioner before the Hon’ble High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the invalidation of his Scheduled Tribe (ST) certificate. The Caste Scrutiny Committee had rejected the petitioner’s claim of belonging to the Binjhwar ST, primarily relying on a 1917-18 entry mentioning the caste of the petitioner’s grandfather. However, the Committee failed to verify whether the caste “Binjhwar” indeed appeared in the government-maintained records or to address the validity of that historical entry in today’s legal context. During arguments, the learned AGP representing the State admitted to the Court that he could not trace the caste “Binjhwar” in official records—a significant concession, especially since the Committee had not recorded any concrete finding on the non-existence of the said caste. The Hon’ble Bench of Justices Nitin W. Sambre and Sachin S. Deshmukh noted these gaps and issued notice for final disposal, returnable on 30th July 2025. Crucially, they directed that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner, who currently occupies an elected post based on his ST certificate. This interim relief affirms a key constitutional value: a person’s identity and rights cannot be lightly invalidated without due diligence and clear reasoning by authorities. At Charlewar Associates, we remain committed to standing by individuals who face discrimination or administrative injustice. This case reflects our firm’s enduring dedication to constitutional advocacy and tribal rights..

Read more

Case Insight: Ashok Yadav & Pallavi Majgar v. State of Maharashtra Order Date: 18th June 2025 Court: Additional Sessions Court, Nagpur Defense Counsel: Advocate Ishwar S. Charlewar, Charlewar Associates Overview Charlewar Associates successfully secured anticipatory bail for two professionals—Ashok Ramnath Yadav, a film director based in Mumbai, and Pallavi Mangesh Majgar, an artist—in a sensitive case involving allegations of abetment of suicide. The case, registered as Crime No. 245/2025 at Dhantoli Police Station, Nagpur, was among the first to be handled under the recently enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. Background: The Allegations The incident stems from the tragic suicide of Ashish Arun Ubale, whose death on 17th May 2025 led to a criminal investigation under the new legal codes. The police alleged that Mr. Ubale was subjected to psychological pressure via a WhatsApp group titled “64 Payment Dispute.” Key allegations included: Abusive and threatening messages demanding repayment of dues. A WhatsApp message from the deceased referencing “mental torture.” Digital traces pointing to a group conversation involving 14 members, including the applicants. The prosecution argued that these interactions created a hostile environment that may have contributed to the deceased’s emotional state. Defense Counsel’s Response Represented by Adv. Ishwar S. Charlewar, the applicants sought protection from arrest under Section 482 of BNSS, citing the following: Lack of direct provocation or intent to abet suicide. No prior criminal record and clean professional standing. All relevant WhatsApp messages and digital evidence had been seized, reducing the need for custodial interrogation. Willingness to cooperate with the investigation and comply with procedural requirements. The defense emphasized that the applicants, both respected professionals in their respective creative fields, were being drawn into a criminal proceeding without conclusive evidence of abetment. Court’s Decision The Hon’ble Court, after evaluating the facts and perusing the case papers, granted anticipatory bail to Ashok Yadav and Pallavi Majgar with the following conditions: Attendance at the concerned police station every Monday and Friday until the filing of the chargesheet. Prohibition from tampering with evidence or contacting witnesses. Submission of address proof and phone details of the applicants and their relatives. Restriction on foreign travel without prior court approval. The Court also observed that the WhatsApp messages had already been secured and custodial interrogation was not essential. Legal and Social Relevance This case underscores several evolving aspects of Indian criminal law: The complexities of attributing criminal liability in digital group interactions. The role of psychological evidence in abetment charges. The practical application of BNSS and BNS provisions in early-stage litigation. The urgent need to distinguish between social pressure and criminal abetment in online communications. For professionals like Mr. Yadav and Ms. Majgar, this case also raises important concerns about how creative collaborations, when soured by financial disputes, can quickly escalate into legal crises in the digital age. Charlewar Associates’ Approach At Charlewar Associates, we approach every matter—no matter how sensitive or complex—with precision, discretion, and diligence. Advocate Ishwar Charlewar’s strategy in this case reflected not just legal acumen but also a commitment to protecting the rights of the accused while respecting the gravity of the loss involved. This anticipatory bail order reflects our firm’s belief that: “Justice must not be delayed, but it must also not be denied on the basis of assumption.” Conclusion The Ashok Yadav & Pallavi Majgar case is more than a bail matter—it is a reminder of the changing landscape of digital responsibility, mental health, and criminal law. Charlewar Associates is proud to have contributed to a just, fair, and legally sound resolution in a case that required both human understanding and sharp legal insight. For experienced legal counsel in criminal, cyber, and digital-era litigation—contact Charlewar Associates..

Read more

The Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court directed the Sessions Court not to proceed in the matter till the next date of hearing. The Applicant Chandrashekhar .S. Jhadav a retired chief fire officer of NMC has approached the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court by filing criminal application challenging the session court order of rejecting the application for discharge. The offense under section 13(1)(d), 13(2) of Prevention of corruption act, came to be registered in Crime No.3520 of 2013 against the applicant Chandrashekhar Jhadav and other co-accused, on the pretext that by issuing the Fire NOC to one Pratibha Khandelwal to the tune of Rs.1,13,75,500/- The Session Court rejected the applicant for discharge filed by the applicant/accused Shri Chandrashekhar Jhadav. The matter came before the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court, comprising of Justice M.W. Chandwani. The Counsel for Applicant Adv. Ishwar.S. Charlewar along with Adv. Kadambini Meshram and Adv. Swapnil Bharti contended before the court that there are no allegations about the accepting any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage which is a condition precedent of attracting Section 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988. Adv. Ishwar .S. Charlewar, Adv. Kadambini Meshram and Adv. Swapnil Bharti appeared for the applicant and APP N.B. Jawade represented the state..

Read more