Dr Prerana Rajendra Aher@Prerna Tukaran Patil And ANR v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date:
2025.01.23 19:26:25 +0530 CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Chitra Sonawane 902-WP-600-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Cri.Writ Petition No.600 of 2025 Dr Prerana Rajendra Aher @ Prerana Tukaram Patil Age about 36 years, Occ.Doctor, R/at 59, Shivram Nagar, Basmat Road, Bhind Agrawal Mangal Karyalaya, Parbhani.
2.
Dr Pravin Tukaram Patil AGe about 42 years, Occ.Radiologist, R/at. C/o. Prerana Tukaram Patil, 59, Shivram NAgar, Basmat Road, Bhind Agrawal Mangal Karyalaya, Parbhani.
...
Petitioners/Accused.
Vs.
1.
The State of Maharashtra Through PSO Panchvati Nashik... Respondent No.1. 2.
Dr Rajendra Bahusaheb Aher, Age about 42 years, Occ: Doctor, R/at. 8, Sayali Heights A, Radha Nagar, Makhmalabad Road, Nashik.
... Respondent No.2/ Original Complainant --- Mr Jaydeep Deo for the petitioners.
Mr Yogesh Y Dabke, APP for the respondent/State. None for respondent No.2.
Page No. 1 of 3
Chitra Sonawane 902-WP-600-2025.doc Coram : R.N.Laddha, J.
Date : 23 January 2025.
P.C. :
Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners.
2.
The petitioners in this petition are arraigned as accused in a private complaint filed by respondent No.2. The complaint led to the issuance of process for an offence punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.
It is a well-established principle of law that the Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction sparingly. Specifically, when the petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remedy to challenge the issuance of process order before the Sessions Court, this Court should refrain from entertaining the writ jurisdiction. However, if the revision before the Sessions Court fails, the petitioners are not barred from approaching this Court under its writ jurisdiction.
4.
In the light of the above, this Court is not inclined to invoke the writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed but liberty is granted to the petitioners to file Page No. 2 of 3
Chitra Sonawane 902-WP-600-2025.doc appropriate proceedings before the Sessions Court. Furthermore, the petitioners may seek condonation of delay, if any.
5.
It is made clear that this Court has not examined the merits of the matters and all contentions of the parties are kept open.
[ R. N. Laddha,J. ] Page No. 3 of 3