Omkar Suresh Suryavanshi vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2026)

Omkar Suresh Suryavanshi vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether Respondent No.1 should be directed to conduct an inquiry against Respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 regarding the alleged misuse of public money of more than 6,78,68,000 rupees at the behest of Respondent No.2. +3 more

Ratio / Principle

A writ Court exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, or section 482 of the CrPC 1973 (corresponding section 528 of the BNSS 2023), shall not issue a direction to the police to add an offence in the Report.

Key takeaways

The investigation in a criminal matter is exclusively within the domain of the Investigating Officer and no interference by the Court is permissible.ratio¶26
As the matter was still under investigation, at this stage no direction could be issued on the prayers made in the writ petition.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), Criminal Writ Petition No. 6831 of 2025, decided 28 January 2026 (coram: Shree Chandrashekhar, CJ & Gautam A. Ankhad, J.). Petitioner sought directions to the State to (i) inquire against Respondent Nos. 2–5 into alleged misuse of public money of more than 6,78,68,000 rupees, (ii) add sections 318(4), 335, 336(2), 338, 340(2), 3(5), 61(2) of BNS 2023, sections 3 & 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Investors Deposit Act 1999 and sections 3 & 4 of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act 1999, (iii) report the status of investigation in Cr. No.137 of 2025 and related complaints, and (iv) arrest Respondent No.2 and accomplices pending disposal. Held: a writ Court acting under Article 226 of the Constitution or section 482 CrPC 1973 (corresponding section 528 BNSS 2023) shall not direct the police to add an offence in the Report; investigation in a criminal matter lies exclusively with the Investigating Officer and admits no judicial interference, as held by the Supreme Court in State of Bihar v. J.A.C. Saldanha (1980) 1 SCC 554; since the matter remained under investigation, no direction could issue at that stage. Writ Petition dismissed.

904.6831.25-wp.docx

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.6831 OF 2025

BASAVRAJ GURAPPA PATIL

Digitally signed by BASAVRAJ GURAPPA PATIL

Date: 2026.02.03 15:20:44 +0530

Omkar Suresh Suryavanshi .. Petitioner

Vs.

State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

...

Mr. Ashraf Kazi i/w. Mr. Ashish Saxena i/b. Vipul Dusingh, Advocates for the Petitioner

Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, In-charge Public Prosecutor with Mr. K. V. Saste, Additional Public Prosecutor, Respondent No.1-State

CORAM : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

DATE : 28^th JANUARY 2026

P.C. :

Following prayers have been made in the writ petition:-

“(A) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent No.1 to conduct an inquiry against Respondent No.2, 3, 4, 5 and the officials of Respondent No.2 with regard to misuse of public money crores to tune of more than 6,78,68,000 rupees done at behest of Respondent No.2 in collusion with others.

(B) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent No.1 to add section 318(4), 335, 336(2), 338, 340(2), 3(5), 61(2) of BNS 2023, section 3 & 4 of Maharashtra Protection of Investors Deposit Act 1999 and provisions under section 3 & 4 of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act 1999.

(C) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent No.1 to file reply stating as to the status of the investigation in respect of Cr. No.137 of 2025 along with various other complaints against same accused.

(D) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition this Hon’ble may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent No.1 to immediately take measures to arrest respondent no.2 and his accomplices.

(E) Interim/ad-interim reliefs with regard prayer clause (C) may be granted.

(F) Any other relief in the interest of public may be granted.”

bgp

Page | 1

904.6831.25-wp.docx

To a Court’s query, Mr. Ashraf Kazi, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the matter is still under investigation. A writ Court exercising the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall not issue a direction to the police to add an offence in the Report. The investigation in a criminal matter is exclusively within the domain of the Investigating Officer and no interference by the Court is permissible as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “ State of Bihar v. J.A.C. Saldanha ” (1980) 1 SCC 554. At this stage, no direction can be issued.

In view of the aforesaid, Writ Petition No.6831 of 2025 is dismissed.

[GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]

bgp

Page | 2