Bombay High Court
HITESH BHAVERLALJI JAINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition is dismissed as there is no material to infer false implication of the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Hitesh Bhaverlalji Jain, was acquitted by a magistrate on 16 August 2018 because the prosecution failed to prove the charges against him. The magistrate's judgment did not record any finding that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the alleged crime. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking relief, alleging false implication despite the acquittal. The High Court examined the record and noted the absence of any material indicating false implication. Consequently, the Court found no basis to entertain the petition and dismissed it.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition can be entertained when the petitioner has been acquitted and there is no evidence of false implication.
Subjects
- acquittal
- false implication
- writ petition
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
- dismissal
Judgment
DTG 110-Wp-866-2020.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 866 OF 2020
Hitesh Bhaverlalji Jain … Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents
_______________________________________
Mr. Manish N. Jain i/b S M Jain Associates for Petitioner.
Mr. Shrikant V. Gavand, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
_______________________________________
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
DATE : 31st July 2026
P.C. :
1) It is an admitted fact on record that, Petitioner after facing a full
fledged trial has been acquitted by the learned Magistrate for the offences
alleged against him, by its Judgment and Order dated 16 th August 2018. A bare
perusal of the said Judgment indicates that, the learned Magistrate has nowhere
recorded a finding that, the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the said
crime. The Petitioner has been acquitted solely on the ground that, the
prosecution has failed to prove the offences against the accused persons by any
cogent and convincing evidence.
2) As there is no material to even remotely infer that, the Petitioner
was falsely implicated in the said crime, we see no reason to entertain the
Petition.
2.1) Petition is accordingly dismissed.
( KAMAL KHATA, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )
Digitally signed by
DNYANESHWAR
DNYANESHWAR TULSHIRAM 1/1
TULSHIRAM GHUMNAR
GHUMNAR Date: 2026.08.06
18:23:32 +0530
Checking your session…