Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4474 (BOM)

JYOTSNABEN D/O KANTILAL PATEL v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

WP/5577/2025 · 2026-08-29

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

ssm 6-wp5577.2025.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5577 OF 2025 Jyotsnaben D/o. Kantilal Patel …..Petitioner Vs. The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. …..Respondents ____________________________________ Mr. Anant Devkate a/w Adv. Seema S. Dighe i/by Adv. Priyal G. Sarda for the Petitioner. Smt. Madhavi H. Mhatre APP, for the Respondent-State. ____________________________________ CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND KAMAL KHATA, JJ. DATE : 29th AUGUST, 2026. P.C.:- 1) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is seeking transfer of investigation of CR No.355 of 2024, registered with Azad Maidan Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code to CBI or State Investigation Department. 2) Record indicates that, after completion of investigation, the Police had filed “B-Summary Report” in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, 64th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai. The said report was numbered as C.C. No.1629/Misc/2025. 1/3 ssm 6-wp5577.2025.doc 3) Petitioner had filed a Protest Petition in the said Report. The learned Magistrate allowed the said Protest Petition and rejected “B- Summary Report” filed by the police in the said CR No.355/2024, by an Order dated 31st July, 2025. The learned Magistrate has directed Azad Maidan Police Station, Mumbai to conduct further investigation and submit final report in that behalf. 3.1) In this precise background, Petitioner is seeking transfer of investigation of the said crime. 4) The question which arises for consideration as to whether the alleged accused persons were having any mens rea to commit alleged murder of Amratlal Patel. Prima facie record indicates that, there was no mens rea attributed to the accused persons. 4.1) It is the case of the Petitioner that, her brother Amratlal Patel had undergone Angioplasty few days before the date of his demise, at Surat. That, despite of having knowledge that long distance travel was not permitted, the accused persons allegedly insisted to shift him in their car to hospital at Mumbai. The accused persons did not avail the facility of ambulance for shifting the deceased to Mumbai and also turned down the request of Mr. Narendra and Smt. Geetaben Patel who were taking care of the deceased to at least travel in ambulance. On 17th April, 2021, Amratlal Patel was declared dead when he was undergoing treatment. After 2/3 ssm 6-wp5577.2025.doc completion of investigation, the police have filed “B-Summary Report” as noted earlier. 5) Perusal of record indicates that, the police attached to Azad Maidan Police Station, Mumbai have properly conducted investigation. However, in view of the fact that, the learned Magistrate has now directed the concerned Police station to conduct further investigation, we refrain ourselves for making further comments. 6) In view of the above, we find that it is not necessary to transfer the investigation of CR No.355 of 2024 registered with Azad Maidan Police Station, Mumbai to any other agency. 7) Petition is accordingly disposed off. (KAMAL KHATA, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.) 3/3 SANJIV SHARNAPPA MASHALKAR Digitally signed by SANJIV SHARNAPPA MASHALKAR Date: 2026.09.09 13:14:26 +0530