Disposed¶16

Govardhan Kantilal Mankar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC27 Nov 2025APEAL/604/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Aurangabad bench interim order, Criminal Appeal 604/2025, Govardhan Kantilal Mankar v State of Maharashtra; crime dated 14.05.2025; investigation stalled - only three witness statements and spot panchanama; no arrest efforts in a serious crime; affidavit dated 10.12.2025 by PSI Dhananjay Ramchandra Kulkarni (deponent not concerned with the crime) claimed no eye witness and petitioner residing outside village, contradicted by both sides; investigation officer directed to file additional affidavit; matter listed 15.01.2026; single judge Sushil M. Ghodeswar.

What did the court decide?

Interim directions: the concerned investigation officer to file an additional affidavit throwing light on the aforesaid aspects by next date; matter to be listed on 15.01.2026. ¶16

Govardhan Kantilal Mankar vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim directions: the concerned investigation officer to file an additional affidavit throwing light on the aforesaid aspects by next date; matter to be listed on 15.01.2026.

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether there has been any progress in the investigation of the crime registered on 14.05.2025 and whether any efforts have been made to arrest the appellant accused in this serious crime. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

The investigation papers before this Court are not showing much progress in the investigation.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

It is neither the case of the appellant accused nor of respondent No. 3 that they are not residing in different villages, contradicting the affidavit statement that the petitioner is residing outside the village.

¶16

Key takeaways

The concerned investigation officer shall file an additional affidavit throwing light on the aforesaid aspects (lack of investigative progress, absence of arrest efforts, and the deponent's residence statement) by the next date.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interim order in Criminal Appeal No. 604 of 2025 (Govardhan Kantilal Mankar v. The State of Maharashtra and others), High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad (Sushil M. Ghodeswar J.), dated 18.12.2025: The Court found that investigation of the crime of 14.05.2025 showed little progress - only three witnesses' statements recorded and copy of spot panchanama attached - and that no efforts had been made to arrest the appellant accused in a serious crime. It further observed that the affidavit dated 10.12.2025 of PSI Dhananjay Ramchandra Kulkarni (a deponent not concerned with the crime), asserting there was no eye witness and that the petitioner resided outside the village, was contradicted by the position of both the appellant accused and respondent No. 3 that they reside in different villages. The Court directed the concerned investigation officer to file an additional affidavit throwing light on these aspects by the next date and listed the matter for 15.01.2026.

Govardhan Kantilal Mankar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govardhan Kantilal Mankar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishal Vasantrao Patil and Others vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Mangesh Chandrakant Ransing vs the State of Maharashtra

Govind Balaji Jadhav vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Suresh Narayanrao Khandare vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Gulab Didalisha Fakir and Others vs Shrimant Vikramsingh Lakshamansingh Raje Jadhav Rao and Others

Vinod Kailas Ubale and Another vs the State of Maharashtra and Others