Bombay High Court
SUBHEDAR PATIL RAJENDRA SHIVAJI (RETIRED) THROUGH PAIROKAR MRS. PATIL PRANJALI RAJENDRAversusUNION OF INDIA (THROUGH SECRETARY DMA) AND ORS.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The AFT Regional Bench, Mumbai, was held to lack territorial jurisdiction, leading to dismissal of the application.
Summary
Subhedar Patil Rajendra (Retired) filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 25 September 2026 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) Regional Bench, Mumbai, which dismissed his application for suspension of his sentence on the ground that the bench lacked territorial jurisdiction. The petition sought to contest the AFT's jurisdictional finding. The petitioners, represented by Brig. Janesh Khera, Senior Advocate, Mr. Shekhar Ingawale, and Mr. Madhav Chavan, later moved to withdraw the writ petition, requesting liberty to challenge the AFT order in a competent forum. The High Court accepted the withdrawal and disposed of the writ petition accordingly. No substantive merits on the jurisdictional issue were adjudicated beyond the AFT's finding.
Issues considered
- Whether the Armed Forces Tribunal Regional Bench, Mumbai, had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the application for suspension of the sentence.
Subjects
- jurisdiction
- armed forces tribunal
- writ petition
- withdrawal
- territorial jurisdiction
Judgment
909-1911-2026.odt
rajshree
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1911 OF 2026
Subhedar Patil Rajendra (Retired)
Through Pairokar Mrs.Patil Pranjali Rajendra ....Petitioner
V/S
Union of India & Ors. ....Respondents
Brig. Janesh Khera, Senior Advocate a/w Mr.Shekhar Ingawale
and Mr.Madhav Chavan for the Petitioner.
Mr.Aniruddha Gurge for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Major K. Shruti Subudhi, present.
CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ
DATE : 30th SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C. :
1 The Petition was filed raising a challenge to the order dated
20/02/2026 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional
Bench, Mumbai and being aggrieved by rejection of the prayer for
suspension of the sentence of the Applicant.
2 The O.A. in which such a request was made and the
impugned order was passed, came up for consideration before the
Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Mumbai and by order
Digitally signed
RAJSHREE
KISHOR
MORE
by RAJSHREE
KISHOR MORE
Date: 2026.10.01
11:55:29 +0530 dated 25/09/2026, the Tribunal expressed thus :
1/2
909-1911-2026.odt
“11. Thus, no case is made out for filing the present O.A. before the AFT
Bench at Mumbai. This Bench is devoid of territorial jurisdiction. The
objection of respondent is accepted. The O.A. is dismissed for want of
territorial jurisdiction.”
The copy of the said order is placed before us by the learned
counsel representing the Union of India, which is taken on record
and marked as x for identification.
2 In the wake of the aforesaid development, the learned
counsel Mr.Shekhar Ingawale who has marked his appearance in
person alongwith the learned senior counsel Brig. Janesh Khera
who has marked appearance through VC on behalf of the
Petitioner, seek permission to withdraw the Writ Petition, with
liberty to assail the said order dated 25/09/2026 in such forum
and before such Authority which is competent to entertain such
proceedings.
Writ petition is disposed as withdrawn with liberty as
prayed for.
[ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.] [BHARATI DANGRE, J.]
2/2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.