Bombay High Court
SAMAD WAHAB KHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioners have an alternate remedy before the Special Court dealing with M.C.O.C.A. offences and may approach the police authority for protection matters.
Summary
The petitioners, Shaikh Mujahid Abdul Majid and others, filed a criminal writ petition seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra. The Court noted that an earlier order in Criminal Public Interest Litigation No. 15 of 2022, dated 13 March 2023, had addressed identical prayers and directed the petitioners to approach the Special Court for M.C.O.C.A. offences or the relevant police authority for protection matters. Since the same relief had already been considered and the petitioners possessed an alternate statutory remedy, the Court declined to re‑examine the matter. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, and the deposit made by the petitioners was ordered to be refunded with interest. The pending criminal application linked to the petition was also dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the criminal writ petition is maintainable when an alternate statutory remedy under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (M.C.O.C.A.) exists
- Whether the Court should entertain the petition despite a prior order in Criminal P.I.L. No. 15 of 2022 addressing the same prayers
Legislation cited
Subjects
- criminal writ petition
- alternative remedy
- Special Court
- MCOCA
- police protection
- jurisdiction
- petition disposed
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42167-DB
917 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1227 OF 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
917 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1227 OF 2021
Shaikh Mujahid Abdul Majid And Others
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
__________________________________________________________
• Adv. Asim Sarode, Adv. Gore Nikita N., Adv. Faij Khan
Jarif Khan for Petitioners
• Mr. A. S. Shinde, Addl.P.P. for State
__________________________________________________________
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 564 OF 2022
IN WP/1227/2021
…
CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 08, 2026
PER COURT :
1) Heard.
2) Though the learned counsel for the petitioners
seeks time to take instructions, the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor has placed on record the order dated
13.03.2023 passed by this Court in Criminal Public
Interest Litigation (P.I.L.) No. 15 of 2022.
3) On going through the said order, it is clearly
evident that the same prayers as sought in the present
petition were also sought in the said Criminal P.I.L. In the
Komal Kamble Page| 1 of 2
917 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1227 OF 2021
aforesaid order, this Court had observed that the
petitioners have an alternate remedy of raising their
grievance before the Special Court dealing with M.C.O.C.A.
offences. Moreover, this Court had also observed that, in
the event of any grievance regarding grant of police
protection, the petitioners may approach the concerned
police authority dealing with such issue in accordance with
the rules.
4) Under such circumstances, when this Court
had already considered prayers similar to the prayers made
in the present petition and disposed of the said petition, in
view of the order dated 13.03.2023 passed in Criminal
P.I.L. No. 15 of 2022, we are not inclined to reconsider the
same in the present petition. Accordingly, the Criminal Writ
Petition stands disposed of.
5) In view of the same, the amount deposited by
the petitioners as per the direction of this Court to show
their bona fides be refunded to the respective petitioners,
along with the interest accrued thereon till date.
6) In view of the disposal of the Criminal Writ
Petition, the pending Criminal Application also stands
disposed of.
(VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
JUDGE JUDGE
Komal Kamble Page| 2 of 2
Checking your session…