KOLHAPUR CITY CRIMINAL COURT PRACTITIONERS BAR ASSO. THR. PRESIDENT ADVOCATE RANJIT J. KAWALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. ADD. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OR PRISONS ORS

2026:BHC-KOL:9632-DB

                                                                       909-WP-1855-2026.doc


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 1855 OF 2026

               Kolhapur City Criminal Court Practitioners Bar Asso.     ...Petitioner
               Thr. President Advocate Ranjit J. Kawale
                         Versus
               The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Add. Director General      ...Respondents
               Of Police And Inspector General Or Prisons And
               Others

                                              ——————
               Mr. Shrikrishna Ganbavle a/w Mr. Viraj Nalawade, Ms. Tanvi Lad, Ms.
               Sharvari Tipugade, Mr. Girish Mujumdar, for the Petitioner.
               Mr. K.S.Thorat, “B” Panel counsel, for the Respondent-State.
               Mr. Shridhar Kumbhar, Liaison Officer Prison.
                                              ——————
                                                 Coram :     SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH &
                                                             NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.
                                                 Date      : OCTOBER 06, 2026
               P. C. :

               1.        At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to

               amend the prayer clause to seek a specific relief for empowering

               Superintendent of jail to administer oath and affirmation for the

               purpose of filing affidavit for seeking bail. Leave is granted. Amendment

               to be carried out forthwith. Re-verification is dispensed with.

               2.        The present Petition is concerned with the compliance of the

               directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in paragraph 48 of the

               judgment in case of Zeba Khan vs State of U.P And Others 1 which
               1    2026 INSC 144


               Arya Chavan                        1 of 4
                                                                     909-WP-1855-2026.doc


directs that every Petitioner/Applicant seeking bail is under an

obligation to disclose all material particulars duly supported by

affidavit. The difficulty arises where the Applicant is in custody and

affidavit is required to be filed by the Applicant seeking bail. It was

sought to be contended across the bar that the Superintendent of Jail

can administer the oath for the purpose of filing affidavit disclosing all

material facts.

3.      Section 3 of The Oaths Act, 1969 (for short “Oaths Act”) reads as

under :

      3. Power to administer oaths
      (1)The following Courts and persons shall have power to administer, by
      themselves or, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 6, by an
      officer empowered by them in this behalf, oaths and affirmations in
      discharge of the duties imposed or in exercise of the powers conferred upon
      them by law, namely:
      (a) all Courts and persons having by law or consent of parties authority to
      receive evidence;
      (b) the commanding officer of any military, naval, or air force station or ship
      occupied by the Armed Forces of the Union, provided that the oath or
      affirmation is administered within the limits of the station.
      (2) Without prejudice to the powers conferred by sub-section (1) or by or
      under any other law for the time being in force, any Court, Judge,
      Magistrate or person may administer oaths and affirmations for the purpose
      of affidavits, if empowered in this behalf
      (a) by the High Court, in respect of affidavits for the purpose of judicial
      proceedings; or
      (b) by the State Government, in respect of other affidavits.


4.      A plain reading of Section 3(2)(a) would disclose that the High

Court can empower a person to administer oath and affirmation in

respect of the affidavits for the purpose of judicial proceedings.



Arya Chavan                             2 of 4
                                                       909-WP-1855-2026.doc


5.      Statutory provisions would therefore enable the High Court to

empower the Superintendent of jail to administer oath and affirmation

only in respect of affidavit to be filed by the Applicant seeking bail for

the purpose of disclosing all material particulars, including criminal

antecedents and the existence of any coercive processes, such as

issuance of non-bailable warrants, declaration as a proclaimed offender

of similar proceedings as mandated by paragraph 48 of the decision of

the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Zeba Khan vs State of U.P And

Others (supra), decided on 11th February, 2026. By an interim order

dated 24th April, 2026, this Court, by way of an interim arrangement, had

directed the Inspector General, Prisons to ensure that such affidavit

shall be processed by the concerned jailer/Superintendent of jail within

48 hours pursuant to which the circular was issued on 24th April, 2026.

6.      The requirement is to empower the Superintendent of jail within

the jurisdiction of Kolhapur Circuit Bench to administer oath and

affirmation for the purpose of the affidavit as directed by the decision

of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Zeba Khan vs State of U.P And

Others (supra). As the statutory provisions of the Oaths Act permits the

High Court to empower a person to administer oath and affirmation, we

are inclined to allow the Petition by empowering the Superintendent of

jail within the jurisdiction of Kolhapur Circuit Bench to administer oath

and affirmation only in respect of affidavits to be filed in judicial


Arya Chavan                      3 of 4
                                                            909-WP-1855-2026.doc


proceedings for the purpose of seeking bail, as directed by the Hon'ble

Apex Court in the case of Zeba Khan vs State of U.P And Others (supra).

7.      In the event, such an affidavit is presented for affirmation to the

concerned Superintendent of jail, the same to be duly processed within

a period of 24 hours, for filing in judicial proceedings.

8.      It is clarified that the Superintendent of jail is empowered to

administer oath only for the specific purpose as indicated in the order

and for no other purpose.

9.      The Petition is therefore allowed in terms of amended prayer

clause (f).

10.     Applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and stand

disposed of.




 [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.]                     [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]




Arya Chavan                       4 of 4