Dismissed

Monika Bhaskar Joshi v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC9 Apr 2013WP/411/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the State to register an OFFENCE was dismissed. The Court held that such a writ cannot be issued as an alternate remedy via Section 156(3) CrPC applies. The Court dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition for issuance of writ of mandamus for registration of an offence was dismissed with no costs awarded.

Monika Bhaskar Joshi Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2013)

cri-wp-411-13

pdp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 411 OF 2013

¶6

Monika Bhaskar Joshi .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra and anr.

¶9

.. Respondents

¶10

Mr. M. D. Modgi i/by Mr. Abhijeet J. Kandarkar for petitioner. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for State.

¶11

CORAM: P. V. HARDAS & A. R. JOSHI, JJ.

¶12

APRIL 09, 2013.

¶13

P.C.

¶14

This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to register an offence against the accused named in the complaint filed by the petitioner.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ramesh Kumari vs. State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) and ors. [(2006) 2 SCC 677].

¶16

A reference at this juncture may usefully be made to the judgments of the Supreme Court in Aleque Padamsee andors. vs. Union of India and ors. [(2007) 6 SCC 171] and Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar

¶17

¶18

cri-wp-411-13

¶19

Pradesh and ors. [AIR 2008 SC 907] as well as recent judgment in the case of Kunga Nima Lepcha and ors. vs. State of Sikkim and ors. [(2010) 4 SCC 513]. In all the said judgments, the Supreme Court has held that such a writ can not be issued directing the police to register an offence as the aggrieved person has an alternate remedy of filing either a private complaint or an application under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Magistrate. In any event, we do not find this to be a fit case for issuing any directions to the respondents for registration of the offence.

¶20

We, therefore, dismiss this petition relegating the petitioner to avail the alternate remedy available to the petitioner in law. We make it clear that if the petitioner does file an application under Section 156 (3) or a complaint case before the Magistrate, dismissal of this writ petition should not be construed as any finding and the court to decide the application filed by the petitioner on its own merits uninfluenced by the dismissal of this writ petition. No costs.

¶21

(A. R. JOSHI,J.) (P. V. HARDAS,J.)

Monika Bhaskar Joshi v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monika Bhaskar Joshi v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nitin Laxman Bhangre Vs the State of Maharashtra

Tulshiram @ Tilsa Ramcahndra Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Asgar Kadar Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Somnath Saiyaji Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Balu @ Pradeep Pandurang Kamble

The State of Maharashtra Vs Ganesh Tukaram Dongare and Ors.