Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeOther LawsBombay High Court Orders Police Probe into Suspicious Calls to Judge’s Wife,...

Bombay High Court Orders Police Probe into Suspicious Calls to Judge’s Wife, Suspects Plot to Malign Judiciary

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

Justice Madhav Jamdar of the Bombay High Court has directed the police to conduct an inquiry into a series of suspicious phone calls made to his wife, allegedly aimed at framing him. The calls were placed by Advocate Partho Sarkar on multiple occasions, raising serious concerns of a possible conspiracy linked to ongoing disciplinary proceedings against another lawyer.

In an order passed on April 29, Justice Jamdar revealed that between April 22 and April 24, 2025, Sarkar had repeatedly contacted his wife, expressing an urgent interest in purchasing a jointly owned Mumbai flat listed on an online platform. A similar call had also been made by Sarkar in October 2023.

Following these interactions, Justice Jamdar personally spoke to Sarkar on April 24 and informed him that he was a sitting judge of the Bombay High Court. Although Sarkar responded with laughter, the judge noted that it felt “unnatural” and suspicious in hindsight. Shortly thereafter, Justice Jamdar checked his wife’s phone and confirmed via WhatsApp that the caller was Advocate Partho Sarkar. At no point during the call did Sarkar reveal that he was a lawyer.

Given the timing of these calls—shortly after the Court had, on April 9, directed the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa to initiate an inquiry into Advocate Vijay Kurle for unprofessional conduct—Justice Jamdar suspected a link. Sarkar is reportedly a close associate of Kurle.

Justice Jamdar has instructed the Senior Inspector of the Malabar Hill Police Station, or another senior official from the Maharashtra Police, to carry out an investigation into the calls made by Sarkar on the specified dates and to submit a report to the Registrar General of the High Court.

The order also noted other related incidents. On April 17, during proceedings before the same bench, Advocate Mathews Nedumpara—another associate of Kurle—allegedly behaved in a contemptuous manner, refusing to comply with courtroom decorum and walking out without permission after declaring he was “not a slave of the Court.” The judge linked this behavior to the April 9 order against Kurle, suggesting a pattern of conduct intended to undermine the Court’s authority.

“These actions appear to be part of a deliberate attempt to target and frame the Court following its order against Mr. Kurle,” the Court stated.

Given the seriousness of the situation, Justice Jamdar also directed that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court for reassignment to another bench.

Public Prosecutors HS Venegavkar and AS Gotad represented the State of Maharashtra in the matter. Advocate Subhash Jha appeared for Mathews Nedumpara, while Advocates Nicky Pokar and Ghanshyam Upadhyay represented Partho Sarkar.

Case Details

Case Title: Sabina Lakdawala Versus Feroze Y. Lakdawala & Ors.

Case No.: Writ Petition No.3707 Of 2022

Date: 29 APRIL 2025

Counsel For Petitioner: Hemali Kurne a/w Maria Nedumpara

Counsel For Respondent: Ashish Venugopal a/w Sagar Shetty

Read More: Govt. Boosts MSMEs With New GST Policy Reforms: QRMP Scheme and Late Fee Relief Introduced

Amit Sharma
Amit Sharma
Amit Sharma is the Content Editor at JurisHour. He has been writing about the Indian legal market. He has covered tax & company litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and Various Tribunals. Amit graduated from MLSU Law College with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. from MLSU, Udaipur, Rajasthan. An Advocate in Taxation, and practised in Tribunals as well as Rajasthan High Court and pursued Masters in Constitutional Law. He started out small with little resources but a big plan to take tax legal education to the remotest locations across India and eventually to the world. His vision is to make tax related legal developments accessible to the masses.

Latest articles

DGFT To Launch Central Processing Dept. for Faceless, Jurisdiction-Free Trade Applications By 2 October 2026

The Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) is establishing a Central Processing Department (CPD)...

Undisclosed Receipts in ST-3 Return Justify Extended Service Tax Demand: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has upheld a service tax...

Importer’s Consent to Enhanced Customs Value Doesn’t Bar Appeal; Valuation Must Follow Statutory Procedure: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad Bench, has held that...

Adjudicating Authority Ignored Remand Directions, Reissued ‘Copy-Paste’ Order: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand 

The Allahabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

More like this

DGFT To Launch Central Processing Dept. for Faceless, Jurisdiction-Free Trade Applications By 2 October 2026

The Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) is establishing a Central Processing Department (CPD)...

Undisclosed Receipts in ST-3 Return Justify Extended Service Tax Demand: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has upheld a service tax...

Importer’s Consent to Enhanced Customs Value Doesn’t Bar Appeal; Valuation Must Follow Statutory Procedure: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad Bench, has held that...