Bombay High Court
TANUJA JIVAK GHADGEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The writ petition was disposed of, with the petitioner permitted to withdraw and to seek the reliefs before the Special Court.
Summary
Tanuja J. Ghadge filed a criminal writ petition seeking police protection for herself, her husband and witnesses, the arrest of accused persons, and compensation. The petitioner’s counsel informed the court that the accused had already obtained bail from the Special Court on 6 February 2025, rendering the arrest prayer untenable. The court held that reliefs under Section 15‑A(6)(a) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, such as protection and compensation, must be pursued before the Special Court handling the trial. The petitioner was allowed to withdraw the writ petition and to approach the trial court for the appropriate applications. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of by the court.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition seeking arrest of the accused is maintainable after the accused has secured bail.
- Whether the petitioner can obtain police protection and claim compensation under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act through a writ petition.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Police protection
- Bail
- SC/ST Act
- Compensation
- Writ petition
- Criminal appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
29-wp221-23.doc
vai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Digitally
signed by
VASANT
VASANT ANANDRAO
ANANDRAO IDHOL
IDHOL Date: CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.221 OF 2023
2026.01.19
19:38:09
+0530
Tanuja J. Ghadge ...Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr.Aliabbas Delhiwala for the Petitioner.
Ms.Supriya Kak, APP for the State – Respondent.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 17TH JANUARY, 2026.
P.C. :-
1. This Petition is filed with different prayers. The first
prayer is for directing the Respondent Police Officers to provide
protection to the Petitioner, her husband and the witnesses. The
second prayer is for direction to arrest the accused in the case
instituted on the FIR lodged by the Petitioner and the other
prayer is for compensation.
1/3
29-wp221-23.doc
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner
submitted that the accused in this case has already secured bail on
6th February, 2025 from the Special Court. Therefore, in any case
prayer clause (b) does not survive.
3. Insofar as the other two prayers are concerned, under
Section 15-A (6) (a) of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the Petitioner can
make appropriate application before the Special Court trying the
case. Similarly, for compensation also, prayer can be made at the
conclusion of the trial after the offence is proved. Both these
applications will have to be made before the Special Court, before
which the case is pending.
4. When we expressed this, learned counsel appearing for
the Petitioner does not press this matter but seeks liberty to adopt
appropriate proceedings before the Trial Court for the said relief.
Permission is granted to withdraw this Petition with liberty as
aforesaid.
2/3
29-wp221-23.doc
5. The Petition is disposed off.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
3/3
Checking your session…