In a Public Interest Litigation seeking directions for police investigation into two FIRs, the High Court was informed that one investigation was complete while the other was ongoing. The Court declined to interfere in the investigation process.
No relief granted; the PIL petition was dismissed as being devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
401-CrPIL-16-2024
Pdp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 16 OF 2024
Basavraj Shamrao Koli
.. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashra & Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. I. M. Khairdi for petitioner. Mr. Ajay S. Patil, APP for respondents-State.
Digitally signed byPRAVIN PRAVIN DASHARATH DASHARATH PANDIT PANDIT Date: 2024.09.25 15:19:06 +0530
CORAM: DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. & M. M. SATHAYE, J.
DATE: 25th SEPTEMBER, 2024
P.C.:
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP representing the State-respondents.
2. By this petition ostensibly filed in public interest, a prayer has been made for issuing a direction to the respondent nos.1 and 2, namely, the State of Maharashtra and the Director General of Police to investigate and take action in respect of an incident which is the subject matter of two FIRs, i.e., FIR No. 171 of 2023 and FIR No. 447 of 2023 registered with Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur.
3. It has been informed by the learned APP that so far as FIR No. 171 of 2023 is concerned, investigation by the investigating agency has been completed and accordingly a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
1
401-CrPIL-16-2024
has been filed before the Court concerned. As regards, FIR No. 447 of 2023, learned counsel for the petitioner informs that the investigation in respect of the said FIR is still under progress.
4. Since in respect of first FIR, investigation has been completed and a report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed and the other FIR is still under investigation, any direction, as is being sought by the petitioner in this PIL petition, would amount to interference in the investigation which is otherwise the statutory duty and function of the police authority/investigating agency.
5. For the aforesaid reasons, we decline to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to make any interference in this PIL petition.
6. The PIL petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.
(M. M. SATHAYE, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should issue a direction to the State of Maharashtra and the Director General of Police to investigate incidents covered by two specific FIRs where one investigation is complete
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Basavraj Shamrao Koli
The State of Maharashtra
Director General of Police
Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya
M. M. Sathaye
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
