1 Cri. W. P. No. 342-2020.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 19 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 342 OF 2020 SANJAY S/O. BHUJANGRAO KSHIRSAGAR VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Adv. Amol R. Gaikwad, Advocate for the Petitioner Adv. A. S. Shinde, APP for Respondents-State 1 to 4 and 7. Adv. S. V. Mundhe, Advocate for Respondent No. 6 ... CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ. RESERVED ON : 31/08/2026 PRONOUNCED ON : 02/09/2026 Order (PER : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.) :- . Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally at the admission stage. 2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought direction to respondent No. 2 to 4, who are the police officials at Aurangabad, to conduct the investigation and register the offence against respondent No. 5 to 7, who are the employees of MSEDCL, who are allegedly responsible for death of his son Shreyas @ Aditya and also to file charge-sheet after registration of the offence. 2026:BHC-AUG:40195-DB 2 Cri. W. P. No. 342-2020.odt 3. According to the petitioner, his son Shreyas had gone to see the rally of Shivjayanti on 19/02/2019 from the top of Corporation Building, where the construction was going on. When he, along with other children was enjoying the Shivjayanti celebration, he got an electric shock due to live electric wire dropped negligently by the employees of respondent Nos. 5 to 7. He sustained grievous injuries and therefore referred to Ghati Hospital, Aurangabad. Thereafter, on the basis of the MLC report, the CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad inquired into the said MLC No. 92 of 2019. However, after recording his statement, Shreyas died on 09.03.2019. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that Shreyas had died only because of the negligent approach of employees of respondent Nos. 5 to 7, since they negligently kept the live electric wire on the ground. He further pointed out that the petitioner thereafter, lodged various complaints dated 11.03.2019 and 19.12.2019 for taking cognizance of the same by the police, but nothing was done pursuant to his complaints. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the statement recorded by the deceased clearly indicated that how a live electric wire was laid on the ground negligently by the employees of the respondent No.5 to 3 Cri. W. P. No. 342-2020.odt 7. Thus, he prayed for granting the aforesaid reliefs. 5. On the contrary, the learned APP has placed on record communication dated 31.08.2026, mentioning that how the son of the petitioner i.e. Shreyas got electrocuted accidentally. Further, he pointed out that the son of petitioner was himself responsible for the incident, as he and his friends had gone there. The communication dated 31.08.2026 clearly indicates that the Panchnama was carried out by the concerned Police Station and binding wire was also found on the spot, which was seized. Moreover, on making an inquiry, it was revealed that Shreyas was trying to fix a banner to the wall with the help of binding wire, but while attempting to do so, the binding wire from his hand touched to the high-tension wire of MSEDCL, which was situated at the distance of 5 to 6 feet. Thus, on inquiry, it was found that the son of the petitioner died accidentally and there was no negligence of the employees of respondent Nos. 5 to 7. The learned APP even placed on record the copies of the police papers regarding the Accidental Death No. 20 of 2019 in respect of the son of the petitioner. It is important to note that the said report has been accepted by the ACP, CIDCO Division. 4 Cri. W. P. No. 342-2020.odt 6. Thus, nothing suspicious is found in those papers regarding the said death. As such, the Criminal Writ Petition stands dismissed. Rule stands discharged. (VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J.) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.) shivani/