Mangesh Ramesh Chavan v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 958 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 45 OF 2026 MANGESH RAMESH CHAVAN

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Mr. Vishwajeet Dhakane, Advocate holding for Mr. D.B. Thoke, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mrs. Chaitali Choudhari, A.P.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3. ...

CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.

DATED : 12 MARCH 2026.

Per Court :

1.

Learned A.P.P. produced on record communication dated 11.03.2026 alongwith the Minutes of Meeting of High Power Committee in respect of the Meeting dated 02.01.2026. 2.

The petition is filed for following relief.

"ii) This Hon'ble Court by way of writ, order or directions in the like nature, be please to grant permission/consent in terms of Clause 4 and Clause 5 (आ) of the Government Resolutions dated 20.09.2022, 10.11.2022 and 14.09.2023 for withdrawal of prosecution and disposal of criminal cases being SCC Nos. 542/2020, 42/2021, 386/2021, 37/2022 and 272/2023, pending before the Learned 3rd CJJD & IMFC, Chalisgaon, District Jalgaon".

(2) 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the crimes in question in this petition have taken place during the Covid-19 Pandemic, and therefore, all these crimes are covered by the Government Resolution dated 20 September 2022, 10 November 2022 and 14 September 2023. According to him, the State Government has constituted a Committee to take decision as regards withdrawal of such prosecutions wherein the sitting Mps/MLAs are involved. He pointed out that the High Power Committee has already taken a decision for withdrawing the prosecutions against the petitioner, as per prayer clause of the petition. The Committee has also considered the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ashwini Kumar vs Union of India and others in Writ Petition No. 699 of 2016. Moreover, on going through the Minutes of Meeting of the High Power Committee, it is evident that the Committee has also considered all the aspects which are required for withdrawal of such prosecutions. 4.

Learned A.P.P. has also conceded the aforesaid position as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner. She further added that as soon as the approval is granted by this Court, the aforesaid prosecutions will be withdrawn by the Incharge Prosecutor in all those cases.

(3) 5.

We thus find that the decision of withdrawal of prosecutions against the petitioner is not arbitrary and every aspect appears to be considered. In view of the same, we allow and dispose of the petition in terms of prayer clause (ii). (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE JUDGE VD_Dhirde