Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Ravindra V.Ghuge, Gautam A.Ankhad
Jitendra Namdev Daravkar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra (Through Taloja Police Station) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
1. When this matter was called out, the original Complainant approached the Court, contending that he has not been impleaded as a Respondent. He desires to contest this Petition. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits on instructions that he is willing to add him. Leave to add the Original Complainant as Respondent No.2. Addition be carried out forthwith. The learned Advocate, Mr. Mohite appears on behalf of the added Respondent No.2.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally, by the consent of the parties.
3. The Petitioner has put forth Prayer Clauses (A), (B) and (C), as under :-
A. That in relation to FIR No.257 of 2025 dated 19.07.2025 registered with Taloja Police Station for offences u/s. 118(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 324(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the arrest and detention of the Petitioner dated 21.07.2025 as illegal, unconstitutional, and violative of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution, and of Section 174 (2) of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
B. That this Hon
The police must obtain a Magistrate's permission before investigating a non-cognizable offence and registering an FIR based on the same facts, according to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The court emphasized the importance of following the legal provisions for FIR registration and investigation, and highlighted the need to prevent abuse of the process of court and secure the ends of ....
The court upheld lower courts' discretion in denying FIR registration, ruling that the petitioner had sufficient evidence and means to substantiate his claims without police assistance.
The police are mandated to register an FIR when information discloses a cognizable offense, without questioning the reliability of the information at that stage.
The registration of FIR under Section 188 IPC without a written complaint from the concerned public servant is impermissible and renders the proceedings void ab initio.
The Magistrate must judiciously exercise discretion in registering FIRs under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., ensuring that mechanical refusals are avoided when cognizable offences are disclosed.
Permission under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. can be granted by the Magistrate upon application from the complainant, validating subsequent investigations. Procedural technicalities do not invalidate proce....
A Magistrate cannot revert to the pre-cognizance stage after taking cognizance of a complaint, making the order to register an FIR legally untenable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
