Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Ganpat Devrao Bhise vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 18 April, 2026

Author: Vibha Kankanwadi

Bench: Vibha Kankanwadi

2026:BHC-AUG:17316-DB
                                               1                             908PIL1.2019.odt

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         908 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 1 OF 2019

                                         Ganpat Devrao Bhise
                                                VERSUS
                                The State Of Maharashtra And Others
                                                  ...
               Mr. Angad L. Kanade - Advocate for the Petitioner
               Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar - AGP for the State
               Mr. Dnyaneshwar R. Kale Patil - Advocate for Respondent No. 5
                                                  ...

                                         CORAM :      SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI
                                                              AND
                                                      NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.

                                         DATED :      18TH APRIL, 2026

               PER COURT : -

               1.           Heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner.



               2.           In view of our order dated 16.02.2026, an affidavit has

               been filed by the Petitioner stating the efforts undertaken by him or his

               organization in the past to challenge the practice adopted during the

               Mangirbaba fair. It is stated by the Petitioner that, since 2013, he, being

               the head of a social organization, namely Lal Sena, has been making

               efforts to prevent unethical, immoral, and sinister traditions during the

               Mangirbaba fair. However, the learned Advocate, while making

               submissions, accepts the position that since this Court took cognizance

               of the matter and directed the Police to take necessary steps, such

               practices have thereafter been stopped at the Mangirbaba fair.
                                  2                            908PIL1.2019.odt

3.           The learned AGP also relies upon an affidavit of Mr.

Nandkishor Yallaya Antarp, Police Sub-Inspector of Chikalthana Police

Station, District Aurangabad, detailing the efforts undertaken by the

Police. It is stated in the affidavit that, in order to prevent the said evil

practice of piercing with a metal hook during the Mangirbaba fair in the

year 2018, the Assistant Police Inspector of Chikalthana Police Station

had issued notices to the trustees of Mangirbaba Trust on 31.04.2018,

thereby directing them to stop such practice in view of the approaching

pilgrimage period. Thereafter, the Police gave wide publicity to stop the

evil practice by installing flex banners, spreading messages, issuing

pamphlets, and organizing meetings of villagers, in which members of

the Village Panchayat, including the Sarpanch, Gramsevak, Up-

Sarpanch, and other office bearers, were called. Assistance was also

taken from newspapers to spread awareness regarding the stoppage of

the inhumane practice of piercing a metal hook into the back of the

body.



4.           A report had also been submitted separately on 26.04.2019

stating that the practice had been stopped, and an undertaking has also

been given that henceforth the Police would remain vigilant and ensure

effective implementation of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication

of Human Sacrifice and Other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and

Black Magic Act, 2013 [hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 2013'].
                                          3                                908PIL1.2019.odt

5.                 Now the learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that,

the prayer of the Petitioner is restricted to the appointment of the

Vigilance Officer in view of Section 5 of the Act of 2013.



6.                 We reproduce Section 5 of the Act of 2013 for the sake of

convenience.

     5. Vigilance Officer.-- (1) The State Government may, by notification in
     the Official Gazette, and subject to such terms and conditions as may be
     specified in the notification, appoint for any one or more police stations, as
     may be specified in the notification, one or more police officers to be
     known as the Vigilance Officer :

            Provided that, such officer shall not be below the rank of an
     Inspector of Police.

     (2)         It shall be the duty of the Vigilance Officer,--

           (i)      to detect and prevent the contravention or violation of the
                    provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, in the
                    area of his jurisdiction and report such cases to the nearest
                    police station within the area of his jurisdiction; and upon filing
                    of complaint to the police station by any victim or any member
                    of his family, to ensure due and speedy action thereon and to
                    give necessary advice, guidance and help to the concerned
                    police station;

           (ii)     to collect evidence for the effective prosecution of persons
                    contravening the provisions of this Act; and to report the same
                    to the police station of the area in which such contravention has
                    been or is being committed;

           (iii)    to discharge such other functions as may be assigned to him,
                    from time to time, by the State Government, by general or
                    special order issued in this behalf.

     (3) Any person who obstructs the discharge of the official duties or the
     work of the Vigilance Officer, appointed under sub-section (1), shall, on
     conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend
     to three months or with fine, which may extend to five thousand rupees or
     with both.
                                    4                             908PIL1.2019.odt

7.            In the present case, it is to be noted that, though an

affidavit of Mr. Nandkishor Yallaya Antarp, Police Sub-Inspector of

Chikalthana    Police   Station,       District   Aurangabad,   was   filed   on

19.01.2019, thereafter no affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State

stating that such Officer has been appointed.



8.            The Act of 2013 was brought into effect to bring social

awakening and awareness in the society and to create a healthy and safe

social environment with a view to protect the common people in the

society against the evil and sinister practices thriving on ignorance, and

to combat and eradicate human sacrifice and other inhuman, evil,

sinister and aghori practices propagated in the name of so called

supernatural or magical powers or evil spirits commonly known as black

magic by conmen with sinister motive of exploiting the common people

in the society and thereby destroying the very social fibre of the society,

and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.



9.            The purpose for which the Act of 2013 was brought into

force was laudable, however, even after its enforcement, such incidents

continue to occur, promoting these practices and reflecting the existence

of persons who encourage them with mala fide intent. It is, therefore,

the responsibility of the State Government to implement the enactment

in its full force. The State Government is also bound to consider
                                 5                           908PIL1.2019.odt

whether, with the passage of time, the Act requires amendment to

include even those acts which are not covered within its definitions.



10.          We are constrained to observe that people who are facing

financial constraints, emotional problems, or who harbour evil

intentions to overpower others, are still resorting to such practices of

black magic or aghori practices. Certainly, when there are persons who

demand such activities to be performed, there are also persons who

carry out these activities for them. In order to check such activities, the

appointment of a Vigilance Officer as contemplated under Section 5 of

the Act of 2013 is essential.



11.          At the cost of repetition, we observe that the State

Government has not yet filed an affidavit stating that such officers have

been appointed. Therefore, it is necessary to issue directions to the State

Government in this regard.



12.          We have also examined whether, in terms of Section 11 of

the Act of 2013, the Government has framed the Rules, however, it

appears that the said Rules have not yet been framed.



13.          Under such circumstances, while disposing of the Writ

Petition, and as the Petitioner accepts that the said practice carried out
                                                                    6                             908PIL1.2019.odt

                             at the Mangirbaba Fair has now been stopped, we pass the following

                             order:-

                                                                   ORDER

[i] The Public Interest Litigation is partly allowed.

[ii] The State Government i.e. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall appoint Vigilance Officers throughout the State of Maharashtra, as contemplated under Section 5 of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and Other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013, within a period of two (2) months from today, if not already appointed.

[iii] The State Government i.e. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall also proceed to frame Rules as contemplated under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and Other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013, within a period of two (2) months, if not already framed.

[iv] The PIL stands disposed of.





                                  [NEERAJ P. DHOTE]                               [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI]
                                       JUDGE                                               JUDGE


                             SG Punde




Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde

Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 21/04/2026 18:48:15