Dismissed

Yuvraj Dhondu Bhadane v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Sept 2021WP/6282/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal writ petition, the petitioner sought a mandatory direction for police registration of an FIR regarding a promotion dispute. The High Court held that the matter arose from an administrative dispute and deemed it inappropriate to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction to grant relief.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's prayer for mandatory direction to register FIR is denied; petition rejected.

Yuvraj Dhondu Bhadane Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

Sherla V.

¶2

23_wp.6282.2019.doc

¶3

Digitally signed by VISHWANATH VISHWANATH SATYANARAYANA SATYANARAYANA SHERLA SHERLA Date: 2021.09.22 16:34:51 +0530

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.6282 OF 2019

¶6

Yuvraj Dhondu Bhadane … Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & others … Respondents

¶7

Mr.N.R. Bubna for the Petitioner Mr.K.V. Saste, APP, for Respondent – State

¶8

CORAM: S.S. SHINDE & N.J. JAMADAR, JJ.

¶9

DATED: SEPTEMBER 22, 2021

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. He invites our attention to the contents of the complaint and submits that since a cognisable offence is disclosed, the concerned police officer was bound to register the First Information Report.

¶12

2. Learned APP appearing for the Respondent – State

¶13

vehemently opposed the prayers in the petition. He submits that the entire controversy arose out of a dispute over promotion of employees and, therefore, it may not be appropriate to issue directions to the concerned police officer to register the First Information Report.

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

23_wp.6282.2019.doc

¶16

3. Upon careful perusal of the contents of the complaint and documents placed on record, it prima facie appears that the dispute arose during the process initiated for granting promotions about the eligibility of interested candidates, who were desirous of promotion to the higher posts on the concerned establishment. In our opinion, it would not be appropriate to invoke our extraordinary jurisdiction in the facts of this case and issue mandatory directions to the concerned police. In that view of the matter, we are unable to persuade ourselves to grant any relief to the petitioner. However, the petitioner is free to avail of an appropriate remedy as available in law for redresal of the grievances raised in the petition.

¶17

4. In the light of the above, the petition stands rejected.

¶18

(N.J. JAMADAR, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)

¶19

Page 2 of 2

Yuvraj Dhondu Bhadane v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yuvraj Dhondu Bhadane v. the State of Maharashtra 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

Satyawan Pandurang Thale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Pushkar Prafulla Shukla and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Kesarbai Ranjit Bhat and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ankit S/O Umakant Sharma(Petitioners Brother Amit S/O Umakant Sharma) Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gargi Arun Chakravarty Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shailesh S/O Ramesh Jaiswal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.