Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

VISHAL PRABHAKARAO DESHMUKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal
APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The Court held that the criminal writ petition should be restored to its original stage for adjudication on its merits.

Summary

Vishal Prabhakaro Deshmukh filed a criminal writ petition (No. 752 of 2026) alleging that Respondent No. 11 fraudulently sold land that had been acquired by the Government, misrepresenting its boundaries. The High Court had earlier dismissed the petition on the ground that the dispute was civil in nature. The petitioner sought restoration of the writ petition, contending that the fraud allegations warranted criminal proceedings. The Court examined the allegations of fraud and the character of the dispute and concluded that the petitioner should be given an opportunity to contest the criminal writ on its merits. Accordingly, the application for restoration was allowed, the writ petition was restored to its original stage, and a date was fixed for listing.

Issues considered

  • Whether a criminal writ petition dismissed on the ground that the dispute is civil in nature can be restored.
  • Whether the alleged fraud in the sale of government‑acquired land justifies proceeding with a criminal writ petition.

Subjects

  • land dispute
  • government acquisition
  • fraud
  • criminal writ petition
  • restoration of petition
  • civil vs criminal jurisdiction

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:41731-DB

                                                                      929 appln 3515-26 .




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      929 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3515 OF 2026
                                   IN WP/752/2026

                           VISHAL PRABHAKARAO DESHMUKH
                                         VERSUS
                      THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                            ...
          Mr. Bhokrikar Mahadeo M., Advocate for Applicant
          Mr. A. S. Shinde, APP for Respondent-State
                                            ….

                                  CORAM       :   SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                                  VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

                                  Date        :   09/09/2026

          PER COURT :

          1.     Heard.


          2.     Though learned APP strongly opposed the application whereby the

          applicant seeks restoration of his writ petition, which came to be

          dismissed by this Court on 21/07/2026, but admittedly, the aforesaid

          writ petition was dismissed by this Court on the ground that the

          dispute involved therein was of a civil nature. However, learned counsel

          for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 11 had sold the land

          despite the same having been acquired by the Government. He further

          submits that respondent No. 11, by allegedly playing fraud, has shown

          the boundaries of the petitioner's land in the sale deed executed by

          him.

                   VS Maind/                                        Page|1
                                                           929 appln 3515-26 .




4.   Considering the allegations made against respondent No. 11 and

the nature of the dispute, we deem it appropriate to grant one

opportunity to the petitioner to contest Criminal Writ Petition No. 752

of 2026 on its own merits. Accordingly, the application stands allowed

in terms of prayer clause ‘B’.


5.   Criminal Writ Petition No. 752 of 2026 stands restored to its

original stage.


6.   Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to place on record a

map of the disputed land showing all its boundaries.


7.   List Criminal Writ Petition No. 752 of 2026 on 23/09/2026.




[VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV]                    [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE]
             JUDGE                               JUDGE




        VS Maind/                                        Page|2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.