Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

DIYA RUSHIKESH KHARAT ALIASA DIYA PRAVIN DABHOLKARversusCOMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The Court directed the petitioner to appear for statement recording and disposed of the petition without ordering immediate FIR registration.

Summary

The petitioner, Diya Rushikesh Kharat, filed a writ petition alleging that the police failed to register an FIR despite a cognizable offence alleged to have occurred on 15 December 2025. The petition claimed that the police had called her to the station on three occasions and later visited her residence on 3 March 2026, but she refused to sign a statement, alleging the police were pressuring her to settle the matter. The respondents, represented by the Commissioner of Police and an Additional Police Prosecutor, contended that the petitioner’s non‑attendance and refusal to sign precluded FIR registration. The Court noted the procedural impasse and directed that the petitioner appear at the police station on 6 March 2026 between 11.00 am and 2.00 pm for her statement to be recorded by PSI Bansode. The Court disposed of the petition, stating that once the statement is recorded the police may take action as per law, and the petitioner may seek further remedy if needed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the police are mandated to register an FIR when a complaint alleges a cognizable offence but the complainant refuses to attend the police station or sign a statement.

Subjects

  • FIR registration
  • cognizable offence
  • police duty
  • writ petition
  • statement recording
  • non‑compliance

Judgment

                    Vina Khadpe                  1 of 3                  11.cr.wp.746.2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                          WRIT PETITION NO.746 OF 2026

       Digitally
                    Diya Rushikesh Kharat Alias
       signed by

VINA
       VINA
       ARVIND
                    Diya Pravin Dabholkar                                        ..Petitioner
ARVIND KHADPE             Versus
KHADPE Date:
       2026.03.05
       16:23:22
       +0530
                    Commissioner of Police and ors.                              ..Respondents

                                                __________
                    Mr. Tushar N. Sonawane a/w Ms. Pooja D. Satpute i/b. Mr.
                    Prashant Hagare for Petitioner.
                    Ms. Mahalakshmi Ganapathy, Addl.PP for State/Respondent.
                    PSI Bansode, Rabale Police Station present.
                                                __________

                                                 CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
                                                         SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.

                                                 DATE     : 04 MARCH 2026

                    PC :

                    1.              The grievance of the Petitioner is that the police officers

                    have not registered the FIR on her complaint. The learned counsel

                    for the Petitioner invited our attention to Exhibit ‘A’ annexed to this

                    Petition which describes the incident as per the Petitioner. The

                    incident is dated 15th December, 2025. The said complaint was

                    received by the office of the Police Commissioner, Navi Mumbai on

                    22nd December, 2025.            The grievance of the Petitioner is that
Vina Khadpe                2 of 3                 11.cr.wp.746.2026


though a cognizable offence is made out the police have not

registered any FIR.


2.            The learned APP on instructions states that the Petitioner

was called to the Police Station not less than three occasions but

she did not attend the police station. Finally, the police officers

went to her residence on 3 rd March, 2026, and even then she

refused to sign the statement.


3.            The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the

police were forcing her to settle the matter with the otherside, and

therefore she did not sign the statement.


4.            We have considered both these statements.


5.            The learned APP on instructions states that if the

Petitioner comes to the police station on 6th March, 2026, between

11.00 am to 2.00 pm, PSI Bansode, a lady police officer shall

record her statement. The learned counsel for the Petitioner

submitted that if the statement is recorded as per her say, then the

Petitioner shall sign the statement.
Vina Khadpe                3 of 3                 11.cr.wp.746.2026


6.            Once this is done, the police shall take action in

accordance with law.


7.            In this view of the matter, the Petition is disposed of in

the aforesaid terms accepting the statements made by the learned

counsel for the Petitioner and the learned APP. In case the

Petitioner has further grievance in future, she will be at liberty to

adopt appropriate remedy available in law.


8.            With these direction and observations, the Petition is

disposed of.




(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)                       (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.