Accused sought mandamus to register an FIR against the investigating officer, alleging forgery of his signature on the seizure panchnama. The court found no reason to disbelieve the panchnama and held the petition was motivated by grudge.
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.
RVC 65 Wp-5195-2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5195 OF 2021
Sachin Nagnath Gaikwad
… Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
… Respondents
Mr. Vikas Kolekar for Petitioner. Mr. A.S. Shalgaonkar, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State.
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 3rd September 2024.
P.C. :
1/2
RVC 65 Wp-5195-2021.doc
and it is drawn as per requirement of law. We see no reason to disbelieve the same at this stage. Prima facie it appears to us that, as the Police SubInspector Mr. S.P. Sutar investigated the same crime and has forwarded the final Report before the trial Court, the Petitioner is having grudge against him and therefore present Petition is filed.
( DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )
Digitally signed by RAJESH VASANT RAJESH CHITTEWAN VASANT Date: CHITTEWAN 2024.09.10 16:27:21 +0530
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus could be issued directing registration of an FIR against the investigating Police Sub-Inspector for allegedly forging the petitioner's signature on the seizure panchnama.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sachin Nagnath Gaikwad
The State of Maharashtra
A. S. Gadkari
Dr. Neela Gokhale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
