Bombay High Court
PRAKASH MANGAL KAMBEREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the dispute is a civil inter‑se family matter and the petitioner has an alternative remedy, rendering the writ petition without merit.
Summary
The petitioner, Prakash Mangal Kambere, filed a criminal writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the police to register an FIR based on his complaints regarding alleged forged sale deeds of ancestral property. He alleged that family members had altered revenue records and executed fraudulent sales, and despite multiple representations, no FIR was filed. The High Court examined the petition and observed that the dispute is essentially an inter‑se family property matter, which is a civil issue. The Court noted that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under criminal procedure law to approach the police or higher authorities if an FIR is not registered. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it without examining the merits of the underlying property dispute.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the police to register an FIR in a family property dispute
- Whether the petitioner has an alternative remedy if the police refuse to register an FIR
Subjects
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Writ of Mandamus
- FIR registration
- Inter se family dispute
- Alternative remedy
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.406 OF 2026
Prakash Mangal Kambere, ]
R/o. Wavaloli, Tal. Karjat, Dist. Raigad ] .. Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra, ]
Through Department of Home ]
2. Senior Police Inspector, ]
Karjat Police Station, Dist. Raigad ]
3. Superintendent of Police, Raigad, ]
Alibaug, Dist. Raigad ]
4. Mukesh Ramlal Bhatia, ]
R/o. Sion (West), Mumbai ]
5. Usha Ashok Johari, ]
R/o. Mahim, Mumbai ]
6. Tarun Rajkumar Malhotra, ]
R/o. Khanda Colony, New Panvel ]
7. Sarala Anil Agrawal, ]
R/o. Andheri (West), Mumbai ] .. Respondents
Mr. Keshav Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs. M.M. Deshmukh, In-Charge Public Prosecutor with Mr. J.P.
Yagnik, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1.
CORAM : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ. &
GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 2ND FEBRUARY 2026.
PER, GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following
reliefs:
“a. This Hon’ble Court to issue a writ of mandamus or any other
writ may deem fit so directing respondent nos.1 to 3 to register
an FIR on the basis of the petitioner’s complaints dated 10 th
December 2025;
b. This Hon’ble Court may pleased to direct the respondents to
conduct a fair, impartial and time-bound investigation into the
1/2
10-WP-406-2026.doc Dixit
offences committed in respect of Survey Nos.9/8 and 45/2 of
village Umroli;
c. This Hon’ble Court may pleased to transfer investigation to a
senior or independent officer if this Hon’ble Court deems fit;
d. This Hon’ble Court may pleased to call for records relating to
the impugned sale deeds and mutation entries.”
2. The petitioner asserts that the ancestral property originally
belonged to one Ambo Ghare. It is stated that Laxman Ambo
Ghare was the head of the family (Karta) and managed its affairs,
and that all members were residing jointly as a Hindu Undivided
Family. Disputes subsequently arose among the family members,
following which certain changes were effected in the revenue
records at the instance of some members. We are informed that
appeals challenging those changes are presently pending before
the Collector. In the meantime, certain members are stated to
have executed sale transactions on 24 th August 2012 selling some
portions of the property and forged documents to the detriment of
the petitioner and other legal heirs of Ambo Ghare. Mr. Keshav
Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that despite
several representations to the police authorities, First Information
Report has not been registered till date.
3. Having perused the record, we find no merit in the petition.
The dispute, as presented, appears to be arising out of inter se
claims between family members in respect of ancestral property.
The petitioner has an efficacious alternate remedy in law if an FIR
is not registered by the police. In the circumstances, Writ Petition
no. 406 of 2026 is dismissed. It is clarified that we have not
examined the merits of the matter.
[ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ]
Digitally
signed by
SNEHA
SNEHA ABHAY 2/2
ABHAY DIXIT
10-WP-406-2026.doc Dixit
DIXIT Date:
2026.03.05
16:11:15
+0530
Checking your session…