Bombay High Court

BABAN SHANKAR BHOSALE AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court imposed a penalty of Rs.60,000 on Constable Durge and disposed of the petition as the missing evidence pertained only to a deceased accused.

Summary

The petitioners sought relief concerning the loss of vital evidence (muddemal) by Constable Durge, which pertained to accused Bhagchand Lalchand Sakla, who had died, rendering the criminal proceedings against him abated. The State argued that the misplaced documents were irrelevant as the accused was no longer alive. The Court observed that while documents related to other accused might exist, the missing evidence solely concerned Sakla, and therefore the petition could not achieve any substantive purpose. Consequently, the Court imposed a penalty of Rs.60,000 on Constable Durge, directing him to deposit the amount within a month, after which it would be distributed among fifteen victims. The criminal writ petition was thereafter disposed of.

Issues considered

What penalty, if any, should be imposed on a police constable for misplacing evidence related to a deceased accused?
Can the petition seeking the recovery of such evidence be entertained when the accused is no longer alive?

Subjects

evidence misplacement
police misconduct
penalty
criminal procedure
writ petition
abated proceedings
victims compensation

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:41302-DB

                                                                            530.21WP

                                                  1

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                        914 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.530 OF 2021

                             BABAN SHANKAR BHOSALE & ANOTHER
                                                VERSUS
                            THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS
                                                   ...
                          Advocate for the petitioners : Mr.S.S.Jadhavar h/f.
                                            Mr.S.R.Shirsat
                              APP for Respondent-State : Mr.N.B.Patil
                           Advocate for Respondent no.4 : Mr.N.B.Narwade
                                                   …

                                        CORAM :       SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                                      VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,JJ.

                                        DATE      :   04.09.2026


                 P.C. :


                 1]            The learned APP, on instructions, submits that

                 one Constable Mr. Durge has already misplaced vital

                 evidence against one of the accused, namely, Bhagchand

                 Lalchand Sakla. However, he further added that Mr.Sakla is

                 no more, and therefore, even if such evidence is gathered, by

                 any method, no purpose will be served since criminal

                 proceedings against Sakla is already abated.



                 2]            The learned counsel for the petitioners submits

                 that he would take instructions from his client as to whether
                                                      530.21WP

                              2

there are any other documents. However, the misplaced

documents are only in respect of Sakla, who is no more, and

therefore, even if the other documents of Sakla will not

suffice any purpose. The learned counsel for the petitioners

further added that there are other accused also.



3]         However, on going through the record, it appears

that the said Constable Durge had carried muddemal in

respect of the accused Sakla and the documents in respect of

other accused might be there on record. Under such

circumstances, the proceedings against other accused may go

on, but no fruitful purpose will be served even if the

documents carried by Mr.Durge are traced out since accused

Sakla is no more. Therefore, the Petition, which is only in

respect of the documents against accused Sakla, can be

disposed of by imposing suitable penalty on the errant

Constable Mr.Durge i.e. respondent no.4. Accordingly, we

impose penalty of Rs.60,000/- on the respondent no.4 i.e.

Police Constable, namely, Mr.Durge, B.No.1927 and the said

amount of Rs.60,000/- be deposited by the respondent no.4

before the trial Court within one month. After said amount is
                                                     530.21WP

                             3

deposited, the learned trial Court shall distribute the same

amongst 15 victims.



4]         Accordingly, the Criminal Writ Petition stands

disposed of.



[VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV]          [SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE]
        JUDGE                         JUDGE

DDC

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…