Dismissed

Dilip Kisan Wadkar v. the State Ofmaharashtra

Bombay HC12 Jun 2014WP/1085/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner alleged torture during police custody and illegal detention. The Court, relying on a negative report from an independent inquiry conducted by the Superintendent of Police, rejected the allegations and dismissed the writ petition and accompanying criminal application.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; Criminal application disposed of accordingly.

Dilip Kisan Wadkar Vs the State Ofmaharashtra — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

910-wp-1085-2009

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1085 OF 2009

¶4

WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.335 OF 2009

¶5

Dilip Kisan Wadkar...Petitioner
vs.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra...Respondent

¶7

None for the petitioner
Mrs.M.H.Mhatre, APP for the State
Mr.S.V.Kotwal, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2
and 3.

¶8

Mr.Jayant Bardeskar, Advocate for Respondent
Nos.4 to 7.

¶9

 JUNE 12, 2014

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

.None for the petitioner. Petition is

¶12

filed through jail.

¶13

2.It is alleged by the petitioner that

¶14

he was tortured by the police when he was in

1/3

Vishal

910-wp-1085-2009

custody and he was detained illegally for

¶19

three days and thereafter shown to be
arrested.

¶20

3.On account of allegations made by the

¶21

petitioner, this Court was pleased to direct

¶22

the Superintendent of Police, Ratnagiri to
hold an independent inquiry. Accordingly
inquiry has been held by the Superintendent of
Police, Ratnagiri and he has stated in the
report that the allegations made by the
petitioner are not true.

¶23

4.Petitioner in this case was convicted

¶24

for the offence punishable under Section 302

¶25

of Indian Penal Code and was in jail. However,

¶26

he was released on parole and while he was on
parole, it is alleged that he had stolen one
truck and had committed robbery and also the
offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420

¶27

of Indian Penal Code is registered against
him.

2/3

Vishal

910-wp-1085-2009

5.We are of the view that since the
Superintendent of Police, Ratnagiri has
submitted a negative report, we do not propose
to accept the version of the petitioner and

¶32

therefore, the petition is dismissed.

¶33

6.In view of the above, criminal

¶34

application does not survive and the same is
disposed of accordingly.

¶35

3/3

¶36

Vishal

Dilip Kisan Wadkar v. the State Ofmaharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Kisan Wadkar v. the State Ofmaharashtra

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

Ranvir Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Dinesh Parakh Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Laila Nadar W/O Razak Shaikh Vs Manda Kishor Kandagle and Ors.

Ranjeet Nanaso Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ranjeet Nanaso Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ranjeet Nanaso Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.