GAUTAM JYOTIRAMJI AWALE v. DIVISIONAL POLICE COMPALINT AUTHORITY NAGPUR THR. ITS CHAIRPERSON MR. S.R. SHARMA AND 2 OTHER
WP/879/2023 · 2026-01-13
Nivedita Prakash Mehta, Shri Anil L Pansare
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 22136 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 22136 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 4-wp-879-2023.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.879/2023 Gautam S/o Jyotiramji Awale Vs. Divisional Police Complaint Authority, Nagpur and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. Nikhil Dawda, Adv. (appointed) for petitioner Mr. K.R. Lule, APP for Respondent No. 1 CORAM: ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.
DATED : 13th JANUARY, 2026
1. The complaints dated 22.08.2022 lodged by the petitioner against the respondent Nos.2 and 3, who are Police Inspectors have been rejected by the respondent No.1 on the ground that the complaints were presented after one year from the alleged act / inaction. The respondent No.1 noted that the incident occurred on 8th June, 2021 and complaint is filed on 22nd August,
2022.
2. Clause 4(b) of the Maharashtra Divisional Level Police Complaint Authority (Administration and Procedure) Regulations, 2018, reads as under :
“4. Complaints not ordinarily entertainable The Authority shall dismiss, in limine, complaints of the following nature, namely :- (a) … (b) When the complaint is presented after one year from alleged act and or inaction. (c) …
2 4-wp-879-2023.odt (d) … (e) … (f) … (g) … (h) ...
3. The complaint is rejected in terms of Regulation 4(b), which reads that the authority shall dismiss the complaint when the complaint is presented after one year of the alleged act and / or inaction. Admittedly, the complaints were lodged after one year from the date of the incident. That being so, we do not find any error in the order passed by the respondent No.1. The petition is accordingly dismissed.
4. The petitioner, however, may avail remedy as available in law, if there is no other legal impediments.
5. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
6. The fees payable to the learned counsel appointed to represent petitioner be quantified and disbursed in accordance with the applicable rules.
(NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J.) (ANIL L. PANSARE, J.) MP Deshpande