Bombay High Court

RAVI ARYA AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided: 27 July 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE

Holding

The High Court directed the 40th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to consider and dispose of the C‑Summary Report within six months, keeping the parties' contentions open.

Summary

The petitioners, Ravi Arya and another, filed a criminal writ petition seeking to quash an order dated 19 October 2018 issued by the 40th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Girgaon, which had directed an investigation into allegations against an Investigation Officer. They contended that a C‑Summary Report had been filed on 7 March 2015 and that the magistrate’s order was improper. The High Court examined whether the order directing further investigation could be set aside and whether the C‑Summary Report should be disposed of promptly. The Court held that the magistrate should consider and dispose of the C‑Summary Report in accordance with law, keeping all parties’ contentions open. It directed that the disposal be completed within six months of receipt of the order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of on these terms.

Issues considered

Whether the order of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate directing investigation into allegations against the Investigation Officer can be quashed.
Whether the C‑Summary Report filed in C.C. No.65/SUM/2015 must be disposed of expeditiously by the magistrate.

Subjects

criminal writ
quash order
C‑Summary Report
investigation officer
expeditious disposal
High Court of Bombay

Judgment

                                                                                 25-WP-5422-2018.doc


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                      CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.5422 OF 2018

                      Ravi Arya And Anr                                         ... Petitioners
                            Vs.
                      The State of Maharashtra And Anr.                         ... Respondents

                                                      ****
                      Mr.Pushpvijay Kanoji i/b Haresh Jagtiani Associates, Advocate for the
                      Petitioners.
                      Mr. Prashant Gavli a/w Geeta Sundwani, Advocate for Respondent
SHARADA
RANGNATH
                      No.2.
WAHULE
Digitally signed by
SHARADA
                      Smt. Megha Bajoria, APP for Respondent-State.
RANGNATH
WAHULE
Date: 2026.07.30
10:42:24 +0530        PSI Rishikesh Kalwaglu, Malabar Hill Police Station, is present.
                                                      ****

                                            CORAM :     RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
                                            DATE    :   27th JULY 2026
                      P.C.:

                      1.        By the present Petition, the Petitioners seek to quash the order

                      dated 19th October 2018 passed by the Learned 40 th Additional Chief

                      Metropolitan Magistrate, Girgaon, in C.C. No. 65/SUM/2015. By the

                      said order, investigation was directed in respect of the aspersion cast

                      upon the concerned Investigation Officer.


                      2.        Learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that C-Summary

                      Report was filed on 7th March 2015 after which the present order came

                      to be passed.


                      3.        Considering the peculiar facts of the case, the 40 th Additional

                      Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Girgaon is directed to consider and


                                                            1
                      Sharada
                                                             25-WP-5422-2018.doc


dispose of the C-Summary Report filed in C.C.No.65/SUM/2015 in

accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and, in any event,

within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. All

rival contentions of the parties are kept open.


4.        Writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.




                                   ( RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.)




                                        2
Sharada

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…