Mahendra Popatlal NaharversusBlock Development Officer, Maval Taluka

DTG                                                         9- Wp-6492-2025.doc



                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 6492 OF 2025

Mahendra Popatlal Nahar                                    … Petitioner
         V/s.
Block Development Officer (BDO) & Ors.                     … Respondents
                   _______________________________________

Mr. Anwar F. Shaikh for Petitioner.

Mr. J.P. Yagnik, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
                  _______________________________________

                            CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
                                    KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
                            DATE  : 16th September 2026

P.C. :

1)              By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

the Petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus directing registration of a proper

cognizable criminal complaint under the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against the perpetrators of the alleged fraud and

forgery involving alterations to the records of Gram Panchayat Khadkala,

Taluka Maval District Pune.

2)              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, the present Petition is not maintainable.

3)              There is another facet to the present Petition. The Petition has

                                                                                  1/3
DTG                                                          9- Wp-6492-2025.doc



been drafted and presented before this Court with utmost casualness, even

the complete address of the Petitioner is not stated in the cause title, and the

verification clause at page No. 28 of the Petition is similarly casually drafted.

3.1)         Despite this Court having pointed out the aforenoted Judgment

to the learned Advocate for Petitioner, he persisted in arguing the matter,

thereby compelling the Court to expend its valuable judicial time on this

non-maintainable Petition.

4)           Being confronted with the Court’s anguish, Advocate Mr. Anwar

Shaikh appearing for Petitioner submitted that, for the inconvenience caused

to this Court, he would pay a cost of Rs. 20,000/- to Bar Council of

Maharashtra and Goa’s Advocate Academy and Research Center, within three

weeks from the date of uploading of the present Order on the official website

of the High Court of Bombay.          The said statement is accepted as an

undertaking given to this Court.

4.1)         Details of the bank Account for payment of cost are as under:-

       Account Name       :-     BCMG’S Advocate Academy & Research
                                 Center
       Account Number :-         000120110001327
       Bank Name          :-     Bank of India
       Branch Name        :-     Mumbai Main
       IFSC Code          :-     BKID0000001
       Type of Account    :-     Current A/c




                                                                                   2/3
                               DTG                                                       9- Wp-6492-2025.doc



                               4.2)        The Petition is accordingly disposed off in the aforesaid terms.

                               4.3)        List the Petition on 21 st October 2026 ‘For Reporting Compliance’

                               of the present Order.




                                           ( KAMAL KHATA, J. )                   ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )


            Digitally signed
            by
DNYANESHWAR DNYANESHWAR
TULSHIRAM   TULSHIRAM
GHUMNAR     GHUMNAR
            Date: 2026.09.19
            11:30:48 +0530




                                                                                                               3/3