(1) 11 wp214.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.214/2026 Vaishali w/o Deepak Ingle and ors .Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court' s or Judge' s orders appearances, Court' s orders of directions and Registrar' s orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Uttam Chakravarty, Counsel for Petitioners. Shri S.S.Hulke, AGP for Respondent No.1. Shri Amol Deshpande, Counsel for Respondent No.2. Shri R.D.Karode, Counsel for Respondent Nos.5. Shri S.M.Vaishnav, Counsel for Respondent No.6. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE & RAJ D.WAKODE, JJ. DATED : 17th AUGUST, 2026. 1. Heard. 2. On 24.7.2026, following order was passed: “Learned counsel for the petitioners invited our attention towards the order passed by this Court on 08.04.2026. The paragraph No.3 of the said order, itself shows that this Court observed that perusal of the impugned order reveals that respondent No.2 has directed the aforesaid Committee to conduct enquiry and submit report within a period of fifteen days which period is over by the time the petitioners have approached this Court. However, upon enquiry Shri Uttam Chakravary, learned counsel for the petitioners makes a categorical statement that the enquiry is being conducted by the said Committee, however, report is not yet submitted. 2026:BHC-NAG:10865-DB (2) 11 wp214.26 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that he wants to seek some instructions as far as the above said statement is concerned. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 shall take instructions and make an appropriate statement before this Court within a period of one week. 4. Stand over to 07.08.2026.” 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of respondent no. 3 in not lodging the First Information Report (FIR) in terms of Government Circular dated 4-1-2017. The circular has been issued by the Principal Secretary, Village Development Department, Government of Maharashtra stating therein that where the complaint is received of financial irregularity (misappropriation) and other such misappropriation of funds of the gram panchayat as also complaint in respect of forgery, the Block Development Officer (BDO), after departmental enquiry, shall proceed to lodge FIR against the concerned, if in the departmental enquiry, there is evidence of occurrence of crime. The circular further clarified that in the cases where departmental enquiry is not commenced, the BDO shall conduct preliminary enquiry and if prima facie the material indicates occurrence of offence, he should lodge FIR and should also proceed to recover the misappropriated amount. 4. In the present case, the petitioner lodged complaint on 21.9.2025. On the basis of such complaint, preliminary enquiry was conducted and now as per statement made by learned counsel (3) 11 wp214.26 for the respondent No.2 the aforesaid enquiry is completed. As per preliminary enquiry report, misappropriation of the amount of fund belonging to Gram Panchayat. Despite such status, respondent no. 3 has not lodged FIR against the concerned viz. the then Secretary and Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. 5. In pursuance of the aforesaid orders, counsel for respondent No.2 has tendered across the bar the preliminary enquiry report dated 16.8.2026 submitted by respondent No.3 which reveals that enquiry committee has given positive findings regarding misappropriation of funds belonging to the Gram Panchayat. 6. As could be seen, in terms of Government Circular dated 04.01.2017, since preliminary inquiry was conducted and completed, respondent No.3 was under obligation to lodge First Information Report (“FIR”). He has not done so. 7. In terms of circular dated 04.01.2017, in case where departmental inquiry has not commenced, the Block Development Officer has to conduct preliminary inquiry and if prima facie material of occurrence of offence is disclosed, he should lodge the FIR. 8. In the present case, complaint has been lodged on 21.9.2025. Preliminary inquiry was conducted and completed on 16.8.2026. As per the preliminary inquiry, misappropriation of the funds belonging to Gram Panchayat is found. Respondent No.3 has not lodged FIR against the then Sarpanch and Secretary. The contents of the circular dated 04.01.2017 are clear, which would mean that respondent No.3 was duty-bound to lodge the FIR in terms of the preliminary inquiry report. (4) 11 wp214.26 9. With the above observations and expectation that respondents shall act in terms of provisions of the law including Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and the contents of the Government circular dated 4.1.2017, we dispose of this writ petition. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) !! BrWankhede !! Signed by: Mr. B. R. Wankhede Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 20/08/2026 19:09:20