Bombay High Court

SWATI NITIN SHIRSATHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is dismissed as the BNSS provision allows fresh prosecution if evidence arises, and the writ cannot be entertained at this stage.

Summary

Swati Nitin Shirsath filed a criminal writ petition challenging the exclusion of alleged culprits Krushna Yellapa Fulmali and Bharat Yellapa Fulmali from the charge sheet in a murder case. The petitioner argued that the sole testimony of the deceased's wife was insufficient to support the allegations against them. The Court observed that the evidence presented was limited to the wife's statement and that no other eyewitnesses were available. It noted a specific provision in the BNSS that permits fresh criminal prosecution against persons if new evidence emerges during trial. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to raise her grievance before the trial court if appropriate evidence later surfaces.

Issues considered

Whether the petition challenging the non-inclusion of alleged culprits in the charge sheet is maintainable.
Whether testimony solely from the deceased's wife suffices to amend the charge sheet against the alleged culprits.
Whether the BNSS provision allows fresh prosecution against persons not originally accused.

Legislation cited

BNSS

Subjects

criminal procedure
charge sheet
evidence
fresh prosecution
BNSS provision
writ petition

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:44672-DB

                                                                         1021.26WP

                                               1

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                        32 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1021 OF 2026

                                  SWATI NITIN SHIRSATH
                                         VERSUS
                          THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS

                                                ...
                          Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr.S.E.Shekade
                            APP for Respondent-State : Mr.N.B.Patil
                                                …

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

                                     DATE      :   28.09.2026

                 P.C. :


                            Though the learned counsel for the petitioner

                 vehemently argued that the main culprits, namely, Krushna

                 Yellapa Fulmali and Bharat Yellapa Fulmali are not arrayed

                 as accused in the present crime while submitting charge

                 sheet but it appears that the allegations made against them

                 by the wife of the deceased is not supported by other

                 evidence. On the contrary, it appears that there were no

                 other eye witnesses except wife of the deceased in respect of

                 the incident. However, there is specific provisions in BNSS

                 which states that if the evidence comes against the aforesaid

                 persons during the trial, then criminal prosecution can be
                                                        1021.26WP

                               2

initiated against those persons afresh. Therefore, we dispose

of this Petition, with liberty to the petitioner to agitate her

grievance at appropriate stage before the concerned trial

Court. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.




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

DDC

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…