Umesh Shantilal Daftary and Anr. vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

Umesh Shantilal Daftary and Anr. vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Remedy reserved in favour of the Petitioners to lodge a private complaint before the concerned Court having territorial jurisdiction over Gandhigram-2 (Uni.) Police Station, Rajkot City.

Issue for consideration

Whether a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking lodgment of crime is maintainable, and if not, what remedy remains available to the Petitioners. +1 more

Court's answer

It is the settled position of law, as reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M. Subramaniam & Anr Vs. S.Janaki & Anr, (2020) 16 SCC 728, that a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for lodgment of crime is not maintainable.

Ratio / Principle

The Petitioners have the remedy of filing a private complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate.

Key takeaways

The Petitioners approaching various forums for the same cause of action is not permissible.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction (A.S. Gadkari and Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale, JJ.; 11th November, 2025). Writ Petition No. 5752 of 2025 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Umesh Shantilal Daftary & Anr against The State of Maharashtra & Ors, seeking lodgment of crime on a complaint dated 4th September, 2024 submitted to L.T. Marg Police Station, Mumbai, on which no cognizance was taken. Relying on M. Subramaniam & Anr Vs. S.Janaki & Anr, (2020) 16 SCC 728, the Court held that an Article 226 petition for lodgment of crime is not maintainable and that the remedy is a private complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate. Noting a parallel complaint with similar allegations before Gandhigram-2 (Uni.) Police Station, Rajkot City, where on 10th November, 2025 an A.S.I. informed the Petitioners that no criminal offence relating to the said Bank was made out, the Court held that approaching various forums for the same cause of action is not permissible. Petition disposed of, reserving the Petitioners' remedy to lodge a private complaint before the Court having territorial jurisdiction over Gandhigram-2 (Uni.) Police Station, Rajkot City.

KSG 24-WP-5752-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 5752 OF 2025

Umesh Shantilal Daftary & Anr … Petitioners

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors … Respondents

Mr. Mandaar Goswami a/w Mr.Siddhant Choudhari for Petitioners. Mr. Vinod Chate, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Yogendra Rajgor i/b Legal Chartered for Respondent No.2. Mr. Vikrantsingh K. Patil, A.P.I. attached to L.T. Marg, Police Station.

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND

RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ. DATE : 11^th NOVEMBER, 2025

P.C. :

By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

Digitally KIRANSANJAYGHUGE signed byKIRANSANJAYGHUGEDate:2025.12.03 10:58:33 +0530

Petitioners are seeking lodgment of crime on the basis of their complaint dated 4^th September, 2024, submitted by the Petitioners with L.T. Marg Police Station, Mumbai, of which cognizance has not been taken by the concerned Police Authorities.

It is by now the settled position of law and as has been reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M. Subramaniam & Anr Vs. S.Janaki & Anr reported in (2020) 16 SCC 728, Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for lodgment of crime is not maintainable,

1/2

KSG 24-WP-5752-2025.doc

however the Petitioners are having remedy of filing private complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate.

Record indicates that, the Petitioners had also filed a complaint with similar allegations with Gandhigram-2 (Uni.) Police Station Rajkot City. That, on 10^th November, 2025 Mr.V.D. Zala, A.S.I. attached to Gandhigram-2 (Uni.), Police Station Rajkot City, has informed the Petitioners that, after conducting the enquiry into the complaint, no criminal offence relating to said Bank is made out and his Application is filed on record.

It therefore appears to us that, the Petitioners are approaching various forums for the same cause of action, which is not permissible.

In view thereof, by reserving the remedy in favour of the Petitioners to lodge a private complaint before the concerned Court having territorial jurisdiction over Gandhigram-2 (Uni.) Police Station Rajkot City, Petition is disposed off.

( RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )

2/2