Kiran Gurunath Chichkar v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Digitally signed by SONALI MILIND PATIL Date:
2026.04.27 17:49:07 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO.4555 OF 2025 SONALI MILIND PATIL Kiran Gurunath Chichkar ....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
....Respondents Mr. Niranjan Mundargi a/w. Ms. Keral Mehta i/b. Ameyprasad Atigre, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, Addl. PP a/w. Mr. S. V. Gavand, Addl. PP, for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Anil Singh, Additional Solicitor General of India a/w. Mr. S. K. Halwasia, Ms. S. S. Halwasia, Mr. Krishnakant Deshmukh and Mr. Aadarsh Vyas, for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
Mr. Amit Kale, DCP-Zone II, Navi Mumbai, present in Court. Mr. Devendra Pol, Senior PI (IO), NRI Police Station, present in Court.
Mr. Sagar Juikar, Handwriting Expert, Addl. Chief State Examiner of Document, CID, present in Court.
Mr. Sunil Chawdhary, representative of Respondent No.2, present in Court.
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.
DATE : 24th APRIL, 2026 P.C.:
1.
Pursuant to the hearing in this Court on 18/04/2026 and
21/04/2026, the learned APP submits on instructions that the Handwriting Expert, who is present in the Court, instructs her to say that the earlier four documents in original form pertaining to the bank signatures of the deceased, have already been received by his office. Yesterday, the Investigating Officer ('IO') has collected further documents from the widow. These documents bear the original signatures of the deceased and are undisputed. All these documents would now be delivered to the Handwriting Expert, today.
2.
She further submits that an officer of the rank of Deputy Commissioner of Police is now monitoring the investigation and he has already taken a decision to transfer the investigation to an Assistant Commissioner of Police.
3.
The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has a two-fold grievance, as set out in the prayers. He submits that it took around 9 months for the IO to register an FIR, only after the Petitioner widow approached this Court. Thereafter, the Petitioner could see clear resistance even on the count of securing the Hand writing expert's report. The hearing before this Court led to crossing one more step
in the investigation. He, therefore, submits that this Petition may be kept pending.
4.
The learned Additional Solicitor General of India, Shri Singh, submits that it is imperative that the investigation is completed expeditiously. He prays that this Petition is as good as worked out and can be disposed off.
5.
The learned APP submits that the Handwriting Expert makes a statement that he would submit his report (as regards the signatures of the deceased person) within 30 days from today. Further investigation in the FIR would be completed within 15 days thereafter. An officer of the rank of ACP would monitor the investigation and if after the completion of investigation, the Petitioner has any apprehension, she could very well approach this Court for the redressal of her grievance.
6.
The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the widow is concerned about seeking justice for her deceased husband. If the investigation is being monitored by an ACP, she would hope for an impartial investigation. If she has any apprehension after the
investigation is completed, she would avail of a remedy for the redressal of her grievance. If this liberty is kept open, the Petition may be disposed off.
7.
In view of the above, having recorded the statements made to the Court, and by keeping the afore stated liberty available to the Petitioner, this Petition is disposed off. (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)