Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
941 WP-4764-2026.DOC skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4764 OF 2026 Vishvesh Sanjay Khandge …Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra …Respondent Mr.Nilesh Pandey a/w. Mr. Sameer S. Vispute and Mr. Darshan Patankar, for the Petitioner. Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for the Respondent-State. API M.T. Bandgor, Manpada Police Station, Dombivali East. CORAM:
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATE :
24th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Jadhav, learned APP for the State. 2. By this Writ Petition, the challenge is to the legality and validity of order dated 27th June 2025 passed by the learned JMFC, 3rd Court, Kalyan in Criminal Case No. SCC 1288/2025 by which proclamation has been issued. 3. Mr. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that by filling the blanks in a cyclostyle manner, proclamation has been issued. He submits that mandatory 24th September, 2026
941 WP-4764-2026.DOC skt provisions of Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has not been complied with, and therefore, the impugned order is illegal. He submits that in fact pursuant to the said order, the Petitioner has been arrested on 8th September 2026 and has been released on 23rd September 2026. 4. Mr. Pandey, learned counsel relied on a judgment of this Court in the case of Vinay Ramnarayan Singh Vs State of Maharashtra1 and more particularly on paragraph Nos. 8 and 9 thereof. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Jadhav, learned APP supported the impugned order. 6. The impugned order is on Page 28 of the Writ Petition. Relevant portion of the same is reproduced hereinbelow : 1 (2021) SCC OnLine Bom. 4577 24th September, 2026
941 WP-4764-2026.DOC skt
7. Thus, it is clear that merely by filling the blanks in a format, the proclamation has been issued. 8. In view of above order, it is relevant to note paragraph Nos. 8 and 9 of the decision in the case of Vinay Ramnarayan Singh (supra), which read as under :- 24th September, 2026
941 WP-4764-2026.DOC skt
8. Yet, since Section 82 is a penal clause making the accused susceptible to punishment under Section 174A of the Indian Penal Code, the procedure enacted under Section 82 is to be strictly followed and it cannot be relaxed.
It is settled law that, where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. Other methods of performance are necessarily forbidden. In the case of Auto Cars V/s. Trimurti Cargo Movers Pvt. Ltd., (2018) 15 SCC 166, the Apex Court has held that, non-compliance with the statutory requirements regarding mentioning of specific
"day, date, year or time" would amount to material infirmity rendering summons, as well as, their service bad in law and consequently it cannot be held to be duly served. 9. In the case in hand, Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code, mandates that the period specified in the proclamation, requiring a person to appear at a specified place and time, shall 'not be less than thirty days'. As against, herein, proclamation published on 18th November, 2021, required the applicant to appear at a specified place within 30 days (emphasis supplied). Thus, period specified was not in accordance with the provisions of Section 82. There lies difference between "NOT LESS THAN THIRTY DAYS" and "WITHIN THIRTY DAYS". Therefore, as stated above, Section 82 being penal clause, making the accused susceptible to punishment under Section 174-A of the 24th September, 2026
941 WP-4764-2026.DOC skt Indian Penal Code, the procedure enacted under Section 82 has to be followed strictly, which has not been followed in the case in hand.”
9. Thus, it is clear that the impugned order is contrary to the mandate of Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1963 and the decision of this Court in the case of Vinay Ramnarayan Singh (supra). 10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 27th June 2026 passed by learned JMFC, 3rd Court, Kalyan in Criminal Case No. SCC 1288/2025 is quashed and set aside. 11. The Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] 24th September, 2026