Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Bombay Police Act, 1951

28 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

MANAGER, PINJRAPOLE DEUDAR AND ANR.versusCHAKRAM MORAJI NAT AND ORS.

1998 INSC 32931 August 1998Dismissed

The Gujarat police seized sheep and goats belonging to C.M. Nat for alleged violations of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and related statutes. A Judicial Magistrate initially ordered that the animals be placed under the custody of the appellant Pinjrapole, but the Additional Sessions Judge later directe

MAULAVI HUSSEIN HAJI ABRAHAM UMARIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2004 INSC 40929 July 2004Dismissed

The appellant, Maulavi Hussein Haji Abraham Umari, was arrested in connection with a train attack and initially placed in police custody. An application under Section 49(2) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) was filed to extend his police remand beyond the statutory 30‑day limit, and the Special Court appr

BABUBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ETC.

2010 INSC 54126 August 2010Disposed off

Two FIRs (CR No.1‑154/2008 and CR No.1‑155/2008) were lodged for communal clashes in Dhedhal village. The High Court quashed the second FIR, merged the investigations, and transferred the case to the State CID, also directing that the charge‑sheet of the quashed FIR be read into the surviving case. The Supreme Court he

GAZI SADUDDIN,versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2003 INSC 41825 August 2003Dismissed

Gazi Saduddin was served a notice under Section 59 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 alleging criminal proceedings, communal disharmony, links with SIMI, a false caste certificate and extortion. The Deputy Commissioner of Police issued an order of externment under Section 56(1)(a), (b) and (bb), which the High Court uphel

ZAKIR ABDUL MIRAJKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2022 INSC 85524 August 2022Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra alleged that the appellants were members of an organized crime syndicate operating the illegal "Mumbai Matka" gambling network. Police raided a gambling den, recorded confessions of several accused, including the appellants, by an Additional Superintendent of Police (Addl. SP) under Section 18

RAJPUT JABBARSINGH MALAJIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2011 INSC 40924 May 2011Dismissed

The appellant, Rajput Jabbarsingh Malaji, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murdering his brother Jethusing by striking him on the face with an axe. The prosecution relied on the dying victim's wife (PW‑3) who identified the appellant, corroborated by two brothers (PW‑5, PW‑6) whose statements were recorded under

RAJU AMBADAS GANGEKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2019 INSC 8424 January 2019Dismissed

The appellant, Raju Ambadas Gankekar, was convicted under Section 304 Part II of the IPC for assaulting Captain Vinod Rawat, who later died from his injuries. The incident occurred on 10 July 1988 at a hotel in Ahmednagar, where the victim was chased and attacked with a gupti. Evidence included a dying declaration desc

AYUB @PAPPU KHAN NAWAB KHAN PATHANversusS.N. SINHA AND ANR.

1990 INSC 23921 August 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioner, Ayub, was detained under Section 3(1) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 on grounds that he was a "bootlegger" and a "dangerous person" involved in several offences. The petition challenged the detention, arguing that the detaining authority had not applied its mind and that t

MANUBHAI ATABHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2007 INSC 71321 June 2007Dismissed

Manubhai Atabhai and his brothers attacked the complainant's son, Danabhai, during a dispute over a wall. Manubhai stabbed Danabhai in the stomach with a six‑inch knife, causing a deep wound that penetrated the liver, a vital organ, and the victim died instantly. The trial court convicted Manubhai under IPC s.304 Part 

MOHMED AMIN @ AMIN CHOTELI RAHIM MIYAN SHAIKH & ANR.versusC.B.I THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

2008 INSC 131318 November 2008Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of confessions recorded under Section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) in a murder‑conspiracy case. The appellants argued that their confessions were involuntary, obtained while in police custody, and later retracted, and that no corrobo

MUSTAK @ KANIO AHMED SHAIKHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2020 INSC 43518 June 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Mustak @ Kanio Ahmed Shaikh, was convicted for attempting to murder Dr. Jaydeep Patel by shooting him from a motorcycle he was driving, with his accomplice as the pillion rider. The prosecution proved the case through eye‑witness identification (the victim and his driver), a test identification parade, f

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.versusINDIAN HOTEL & RESTAURANTS ASSN. & ORS

2013 INSC 47016 July 2013Dismissed

The Maharashtra government amended the Bombay Police Act, 1951 by inserting sections 33A and 338 to prohibit any dance performance in eating houses, permit rooms and beer bars while exempting certain establishments such as three‑star hotels and members‑only clubs. The amendment was challenged on the ground that it viol

SHIVAJI ATMAJI & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

1986 INSC 1814 February 1986Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the dismissal of two police officers, Shivaji Atmaji Sawant and Namdeo Jairam Velankar, who were terminated under sections 25(1) and 25(2) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, invoking clause (b) of the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution. The appellants contended that the dismiss

SANDESH ALIAS SAINATH KAILASH ABHANGversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2012 INSC 59013 December 2012Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Sandesh alias Sainath Kailash Abhang, entered a house pretending to be a mechanic, robbed valuables, brutally assaulted the elderly resident and a five‑month‑pregnant woman, inflicted numerous injuries, amputated fingers, and raped the pregnant woman before killing the elderly lady. He was found to be un

RIZWAN AHMED JAVED SHAIKH AND ORS.versusJAMMAL PATEL AND ORS.

2001 INSC 28112 May 2001Dismissed

The appellants filed a complaint alleging that police officers, who had arrested and detained them, failed to produce them before a magistrate within 24 hours and beat them while in custody. The magistrate, relying on a Maharashtra Government notification under Section 197(3) of the CrPC, discharged the officers on the

K.K. PATEL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

2000 INSC 32612 May 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent‑police officer filed a complaint before a Metropolitan Magistrate alleging that the appellants, police officers, had committed offences including sections 166, 167, 219 etc. of the IPC and an offence under section 147(G) of the Bombay Police Act. The Magistrate took cognizance and issued process, which t

NARINDER S. CHADHA & ORS.versusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI & ORS.

2014 INSC 8448 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a circular issued by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai that added Condition No.35 to licences for eating houses, prohibiting the sale of tobacco and any apparatus such as hookah, and imposing specific dimensions for smoking areas. The Court held that Section 6 of the Cigarettes Act

NARMADA BAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS

2011 INSC 2858 April 2011Case Allowed

Narmada Bai, the mother of Tulsiram Prajapati, filed a writ petition under Article 32 alleging that her son was killed in a fake police encounter in Gujarat and that senior police officials and a politician were involved. She sought a direction for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register an FIR, investiga

AMIT SAHNIversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS.

2020 INSC 5797 October 2020Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the occupation of the Kalindi Kunj‑Shaheen Bagh stretch, including the Okhla underpass, by protesters opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act, arguing that it violated their right to protest under Articles 19(1)(a) and (b). The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ without specific directions, p

PROF. SUMER CHANDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 2847 September 1993Dismissed

Prof. Sumer Chand was acquitted of several IPC offences after being prosecuted by police officers. He subsequently filed a civil suit for Rs. 3,00,000 damages alleging malicious prosecution against the police officers who had registered the false report and filed the challan. The respondents contended that the suit was

RAJESH @ RAJU CHANDULAL GANDHI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2002 INSC 1287 March 2002Dismissed

The appellants Rajesh and others were convicted under IPC sections 120B, 452 and 302, and the Arms Act for the murder of Girish Namdar, alleged to have been motivated by a love‑affair dispute. They appealed, claiming the First Information Report (FIR) was ante‑timed to plant eye‑witnesses, that the inquest panchanama’s

STATE OF GUJARATversusKISHANBHAI ETC.

2014 INSC 147 January 2014Dismissed

The State of Gujarat charged Kishanbhai with kidnapping, rape, murder and theft of a six‑year‑old girl, Gomi, alleging that he abducted her, amputated her legs to steal her anklets and killed her. The trial court convicted him and sentenced him to death, but the Gujarat High Court acquitted him, citing numerous gaps in

RUSHIKESH TANAJI BHOITEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2012 INSC 44 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged the detention of his father under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981. The detenu had been arrested for an offence on 14 August 2010 and was released on bail on 15 August 2010, with a bail condition later r

JAGAN SHRAVAN PATIL & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2009 INSC 3003 March 2009Dismissed

The appellants (accused Nos. 4 and 5) were convicted for the murder of a family member, along with several other offences, on the basis that they acted with a common intention under Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The trial court and the Bombay High Court upheld the conviction, finding that the accused had j

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.versusBHAURAO PUNJABRAO GAWANDE

2008 INSC 2893 March 2008Case Allowed

Bhaurao Punjabrao Gawande, a petroleum transporter, was alleged to have repeatedly engaged in black‑marketing of kerosene and faced several prosecutions under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The Commissioner of Police, acting under the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodit

SHAM SHANKAR KANKARIAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2006 INSC 5761 September 2006Case Partly allowed

The deceased Vijay was tied to a cot and brutally assaulted with an iron pipe and wooden stick by six accused, leading to his death. While on his deathbed he gave a dying declaration to his brother (PW9) and mother (PW10) identifying all six assailants. The trial court convicted the principal accused under Section 304

MAHESH TRAVELS & TOURS & ANR. ETC.versusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS.

1989 INSC 1581 May 1989Dismissed

Mahesh Travels & Tours and other launch operators ran joy‑rides from the Gateway of India to Elephanta Island. A cooperative association of launch owners used a voluntary roster to avoid competition, but the appellants were excluded. The Deputy Conservator of Bombay Port Trust, on police direction, imposed a compulsory

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search