Bombay High Court

ADIVASI PANTHER KAMGAR SANGHTNA MAHARASHTRA STATE, AURANGABAD THR PRASHANT S/O. MAHADEORAO BODAKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is disposed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to file appropriate civil and criminal proceedings for implementation of the Committee order and initiation of prosecution.

Summary

The petitioner, Adivasi Panther Kamgar Sanghtna Maharashtra State, filed a criminal writ petition seeking implementation of an order dated 26‑11‑2018 passed by a Grievance Redressal Committee and also seeking initiation of criminal prosecution against a respondent. The respondent State argued that the Committee order rendered all prayers except the criminal prosecution prayer moot. The petitioner contended that the Committee order had not been implemented and that a civil writ petition could be filed for its enforcement. The Court held that the petitioner may pursue a civil proceeding to enforce the Committee order and may also file a criminal complaint or invoke Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code to initiate prosecution. Accordingly, the petition was disposed, granting the petitioner liberty to take appropriate proceedings for both implementation and criminal prosecution.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner can seek enforcement of the Grievance Redressal Committee order through the writ petition.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for initiation of criminal prosecution against the respondent.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 156(3)

Subjects

Grievance Redressal Committee
implementation of order
criminal prosecution
Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
writ petition
High Court of Bombay

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:39853-DB

914 wp 184-20 .

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

914 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 184 OF 2020

ADIVASI PANTHER KAMGAR SANGHTNA MAHARASHTRA STATE,
AURANGABAD THR PRASHANT S/O. MAHADEORAO BODAKH
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Bolkar Yogesh B., Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State
Mr. Dighe Pravin S., Advocate for Respondent Nos.9 & 10
….

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

Date : 01/09/2026

PER COURT :
1. Heard.

2. Learned APP, by pointing out the order passed by the Grievance
Redressal Committee, submits that in view of the said order, none of
the prayers in the present petition survive, except the prayer seeking
initiation of criminal prosecution against the concerned respondent.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the order
was passed by the Grievance Redressal Committee on 26/11/2018, the
same has not yet been implemented. In that regard, the petitioner may
avail of an appropriate remedy by filing a civil writ petition.

4. As regards the prayer seeking initiation of criminal prosecution,
the petitioner may file a complaint before the concerned police station
or take recourse to Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.

VS Maind/ Page|1
914 wp 184-20 .

5. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of with liberty
to the petitioner to take out an appropriate proceeding seeking a
direction for implementation of the order dated 26/11/2018 passed by
the Grievance Redressal Committee and also to take out an appropriate
proceeding for initiation of criminal prosecution against the concerned
respondent.

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

VS Maind/ Page|2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…