Bombay High Court

ASHOK TRIMBAK MADHIKAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is dismissed; the Revenue Officer, not the Court, may take action against the company if permitted by law.

Summary

The petitioners sought a court direction to initiate criminal prosecution against Respondent No.10, a company, for allegedly carrying out illegal excavation. The petition was filed after the petitioner’s counsel was elevated to a judgeship. The police investigated the matter and concluded that an offence under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code appeared to have been committed, and consequently referred the petitioners’ application to the Revenue Department. The Court held that any action against the company must be taken by the Revenue Officer, if permissible under law, and declined to issue any direction to the police officials (Respondents Nos.8 and 9). Accordingly, the petition was disposed without any order for prosecution.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can direct the initiation of criminal prosecution against a private company for illegal excavation.
Whether the Court can issue directions to police officials in a matter already investigated by them.
Whether the Revenue Officer has jurisdiction to take action under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.

Legislation cited

Maharashtra Land Revenue Code

Subjects

illegal excavation
criminal prosecution
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
revenue department jurisdiction
police investigation

Judgment

                                   (1)
                                               917- Cri.W. P. 131-2021.odt
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 131 OF 2021

               ASHOK TRIMBAK MADHIKAR AND OTHERS
                                VERSUS
              THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                 …..
              APP for Respondents: Mr. S. J. Salgare
              Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. Pallav Sinha
                                             h/f Mr. S. V. Adwant
                                 ......

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

                    DATED :      SEPTEMBER 03, 2026

ORDER:-

1.    Though the learned counsel representing the petitioner has

been elevated as Judge of this Court, but on perusal of the record it

appears that the direction is sought by the petitioner to initiate

criminal prosecution against respondent No.10-company for illegal

excavation.



2.    However, the learned A.P.P., on instructions submits that, the

matter was inquired by police personnel and it was found that the

offence under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code was appeared to be

committed, and therefore, the police personnel forwarded the

applications of the petitioner for further inquiry to Revenue

Department.
                                   (2)
                                                   917- Cri.W. P. 131-2021.odt
3.     Under such circumstances, it will be the responsibility of the

Revenue Officer to take any action, if permissible under law, against

the respondent No.10.     No direction can be given at this juncture to

respondent Nos.8 and 9, who are the police officials.



4.     As such, the petition stands disposed of.




(VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV)              (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
      JUDGE                                  JUDGE

YSK/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…