Digambar Haribhau Pajgade v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Chief Secretary

2026:BHC-NAG:199-DB 13-PIL Cri-3-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (CRIMINAL) NO. 3 OF 2025 (Digambar Haribhau Pajgade Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Petitioner in-person.

Mr. S.S. Doifode, A.P.P. for respondent nos. 1 to 5/State. .....

CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.

JANUARY 8, 2026 The prayers in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) read as under :

"(i) To issue appropriate Writ, order or direction to respondent no 1 to 5 to take action against them.

(ii) To take criminal action against the Respondent No. 1 to 5 for not taking action against the accused despite the orders of Hon'ble High Court.

(iii) Direct VNIT, Nagpur to carry out a further investigation into the construction of the projects set out in the Petition.

(iv) and (v) ...."

2] As could be seen, the first prayer reads that directions be issued to respondent nos. 1 to 5 to take action against them, but who are included in the term 'them' is not disclosed.

3] Nonetheless, it appears that the offence has been registered against five persons, namely, Shri Sudhakar Rama Borse, Rajesh Sriram Sontakke, Kannajirao Suryanarayan Vemallkonda, Shri Suresh Wamanrao Mhatre and Shri Sumit Rameshchandra Bajoriya, under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, vide Crime

13-PIL Cri-3-2025 No. 198/2018, with the Police Station - Bhatkuli, District - Amravati. These five persons are the Officers of the Irrigation Department.

4] The grievance of the petitioner is that the Anti Corruption Bureau has intentionally avoided to take action against the remaining Directors of 'Bajoria Construction Company'.

5] If that be so, the petitioner may approach the jurisdictional Magistrate with the grievance. The issue involved cannot be taken up in PIL.

6] So far as the prayer seeking directions to the VNIT, Nagpur, to carry out further investigation into the construction projects is concerned, the petitioner shall conduct detail study of the matter. He shall go through the specifications of the items executed in the projects under question and deficiencies therein, and after collecting cogent evidence, he may approach the Court for appropriate remedy, which shall be then entertained, if otherwise is filed in public interest.

7] With the aforesaid observations, the PIL is disposed of.

(JUDGE) (JUDGE) Sumit Signed by: Mr. Sumit Agrawal Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 08/01/2026 17:18:21