Bombay High Court

TAYUB AMIN SAYED AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Decided: 28 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

A writ petition under Article 226 for registration of an FIR is not maintainable where the police have declined to take cognizance, as per the Supreme Court’s precedent.

Summary

The petitioners, Tayub Amin Sayed and another, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking the registration of FIRs based on complaints dated 5 June 2026, 26 June 2026 and 12 August 2026, which the police had not taken cognizance of. The High Court examined whether such a petition is maintainable in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Sujal Vishwas Attavar v. State of Maharashtra (2026 SCC OnLine SC 798). The Court held that the Supreme Court precedent precludes a writ petition for FIR registration when the police have declined to act. Consequently, the petition was deemed non‑maintainable. The Court disposed of the petition without ordering any further action. The decision reaffirms the limited scope of judicial intervention in the registration of FIRs under Article 226.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition under Article 226 seeking registration of an FIR, when the police have not taken cognizance, is maintainable.

Subjects

Article 226
FIR registration
maintainability
writ petition
criminal procedure
judicial intervention

Judgment

                      DTG                                                        20-Wp-4725-2026.doc



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                         CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                          WRIT PETITION NO. 4725 OF 2026

                      Tayub Amin Sayed & Anr.                           … Petitioners
                            V/s.
                      The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                   … Respondents
                                     _______________________________________

                      Adv. M.R. Chouhan for Petitioners.

                      Mr. Shrikant V. Gavand, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.

                      Mr. Mahendra Bagwe, PSI, Mahim Police Station, Mumbai, present.
                                    _______________________________________

                                               CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
                                                       KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
                                               DATE  : 28th September 2026
                      P.C. :

                      1)          Present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

                      for registration of FIR on the basis of complaints dated 5 th June 2026, 26th

                      June 2026 and 12th August 2026, submitted with the concerned Police

                      Station, of which cognizance is not taken, is not maintainable, in view of

                      Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sujal Vishwas Attavar

                      and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC

                      798.

                      1.1)        Petition is accordingly disposed off.



                                  ( KAMAL KHATA, J. )                     ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )
DNYANESHWAR
TULSHIRAM
GHUMNAR

Digitally signed by
DNYANESHWAR
TULSHIRAM GHUMNAR                                                                                      1/1
Date: 2026.10.05
16:03:25 +0530

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

M R Chouhan