Bombay High Court
Shahnawaz Qutabuddin Shaikh vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 11 November, 2025
Author: A. S. Gadkari
Bench: A. S. Gadkari
KSG 60-WPST-19734-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 19734 OF 2024
Shahnawaz Qutbuddin Shaikh ... Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors ... Respondents
_______________________________________
Mr. Tariq Khan (through VC) a/w Mr. Husain Khan for the Petitioner.
Ms. Madhavi H. Mhatre, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Satyanarayan Chaudhari, Jt. Commissioner of Police, Mumbai.
Mr. Angad Khose, P.S.I. attached to Shivajinagar Police Station, Mumbai.
_______________________________________
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.
DATE : 11th NOVEMBER, 2025 P.C. :
1) It is the case of the Petitioner that, he was illegally detained at Police Station in the midnight by the investigating officer of the present crime. Perusal of Affidavit filed by P.S.I Mr. Angad Khose attached to Shivajinagar Police Station, Mumbai clearly indicates that, either he is oblivious of the fundamentals of law which a police officer has to follow or has scant respect towards the law of land and in particular, the principles of law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court from time to time.
2) It prima facie appears that, he has clearly violated the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State 1/3 ::: Uploaded on - 15/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 21:33:52 ::: KSG 60-WPST-19734-2024.doc of Bihar, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 , the said fact can clearly be discerned from paragraph No.6 of his Affidavit dated 26 th November, 2024. The investigating officer in unequivocal terms has admitted the fact that, on 4 th September, 2024, the Petitioner was called to police station and in the police station itself the investigating officer was preparing a notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS Act which is pari materia to Section 41A of the Cr.P.C. The investigating officer has also admitted that, on 4 th September, 2024 at about 02:21 a.m. the notice of arrest was given to the Petitioner under Section 47(1)(2) of BNSS and the intimation of his arrest was given to his friend namely Amrula Chaudhary under Section 48 of BNSS. Upon a query by this Court, it was informed that the contemporaneous record indicating intimation given to Amrula Chaudhary is not there in the file of investigation.
Perusal of F.I.R indicates that, all the offences alleged against the Petitioner have prescribed punishment up to 7 years only and not more than it.
3) The file of investigation consists in all 131 pages. The pagination on the said file was effected under our directions by the clerk from the office of the Public Prosecutor in pencil.
4) It prima facie appears that, the investigating officer of the present crime has violated the fundamental rights of citizen of India and clearly breached the mandate of law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court from time to time.
2/3 ::: Uploaded on - 15/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 21:33:52 :::
KSG 60-WPST-19734-2024.doc
5) At this stage learned APP on instructions from Joint
Commissioner of Police, (Crime) submitted that, the said Authority will personally look into the case seriously and will submit a report to this Court on the next occasion.
6) At the request of learned APP, stand over to 18 th November, 2025.
( RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. ) Digitally signed by KIRAN KIRAN SANJAY SANJAY GHUGE GHUGE Date:
2025.11.15 10:25:53 +0530 3/3 ::: Uploaded on - 15/11/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 21/11/2025 21:33:52 :::