Bombay High Court
SATISH S/O ASHOK WAGHELAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate a prior police complaint, so the Special Court's rejection of the Section 156(3) application was upheld.
Summary
Satish Waghela appealed against a Special Court order that rejected his application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Special Court had held that the appellant had not first lodged a complaint with the police concerning the alleged offences. The High Court examined whether this finding was perverse or erroneous. Finding no error, the Court dismissed the appeal, directing the appellant to approach the police station and file a complaint if he wishes. The appeal was therefore disposed of with dismissal.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant had made a prior complaint to the police before filing an application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 156(3)
Subjects
- Criminal Procedure
- Section 156(3)
- Police Complaint
- Appeal Dismissal
- Special Court
Judgment
1 21-APEAL 110-26.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.110 OF 2026
Satish s/o Ashok Waghela … Appellant
Vs.
State of Maharashtra … Respondent
-----
Ms. Lucy Massey, appointed Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. P. H. Gaikwad, APP for the Respondent-State.
-----
CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE : 02ND SEPTEMBER 2026
Digitally
P.C. :
signed by
MUGDHA
MUGDHA MANOJ
MANOJ PARANJAPE
PARANJAPE Date:
2026.09.03
1. This Appeal takes exception to the order dated 12 th October 2022
11:07:15
+0530
passed by the Special Court/Sessions Court in Criminal Miscellaneous
Application No.417 of 2022.
2. By the impugned order, the Learned Special Court has rejected the
application filed by the present Appellant under Section 156(3) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
3. I have perused the impugned order. It appears that the Special Court
has rejected the application on the ground that there is nothing to show
that the Appellant before filing the application under Section 156(3) of
the Criminal Procedure Code, had made the complaint to the concerned
police station in respect of alleged offences.
Mugdha 1 of 2
2 21-APEAL 110-26.doc
4. The above finding is not shown to be perverse. I am therefore not
inclined to entertain the present appeal. The appeal is dismissed. However,
it would be open to the Appellant to approach the concerned police
station and lodge the complaint in respect of alleged offences.
5. The Criminal Appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(N.R. BORKAR, J.)
Mugdha 2 of 2
Checking your session…