Dismissed

Rajnikant S/O Daluramji Borele v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Addl. Chief Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC4 Mar 2013WP/531/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A social worker challenged a communication withdrawing police protection via a criminal writ petition. The court observed no fault with the withdrawal and adjourned the matter, granting liberty to approach authorities if protection is needed again.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to apply for police protection in future; criminal writ petition dismissed.

Rajnikant S/O Daluramji Borele Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶3

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.531/2012

¶4

Rajnikant Daluramji Borele

¶5

...Versus...

¶6

State of Maharashtra, through Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others

¶7

- - - - ------------- - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

¶9

Mr. Bhangde, Adv. for petitioner.
Mr. A.S. Sonare, APP for State/respondents.

¶10

CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE AND

¶11

A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ.
DATE : 4.03.2013

¶12

Heard Mr. Bhangde, learned counsel for the

¶13

petitioner and Mr. Sonare, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State/respondents.

¶14

By this petition the petitioner challenges

¶15

the communication dated 10/10/2011 issued by

¶16

respondent no.3 withdrawing police protection

¶17

granted to the petitioner. According to the
petitioner he is a Social Worker. He was granted

¶18

¶19

police protection of one Constable on 29/7/2010.
Thereafter on 27/8/2010 two Constables were

¶20

deployed to give protection to the petitioner and
thereafter by order dated 10/10/2011, which is
impugned, the respondent no.3 has withdrawn the
police protection.

¶21

Mr. Bhangde states that presently the

¶22

petitioner is in Nepal and the matter may be
adjourned. On 20th February, 2013 time was granted
to the petitioner to take instructions regarding
withdrawal of the petition.

¶23

Having heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor
for State/respondents and having perused the record
and the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the
respondent no.4, we are of the considered opinion
that no fault can be found with the impugned
communication dated 10/10/2011 withdrawing the free
police protection to the petitioner. Moreover, the
petitioner is presently in Nepal. He is granted
liberty to approach the competent authority for
police protection, if an occasion arises and in case

¶24

¶25

such an application is made the competent authority
shall decide the same in accordance with law.

¶26

With above observations, writ petition

¶27

stands dismissed.

¶28

JUDGEJUDGE

¶29

Tambaskar.

Rajnikant S/O Daluramji Borele v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Addl. Chief Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajnikant S/O Daluramji Borele v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Addl. Chief Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nandlal Hiralalji Gupta Vs the Commissioner of Police, Amravati

Sharmendra Roopkishore Maheshwari and Another Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secretary, Home Dept. and Others

Wasim @ Bhurya Imam Bhawanlwale Vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Ps Washim

Kamalakar @ Kashinath Deorao Ghoglethe State of Kj Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gajanan Kalipuri Vs the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Divsn. Amravati and Anr.

Baliram Raghunath Kotwar and 2 Others Vs Shiv Shakti Sanstha, Thr. Its President Bharatsingh Thukelsingh Dhudhnag and Others