Pradip Bibhishan Diwane v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2026:BHC-AUG:22838-DB 648.26WP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 1001 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.648 OF 2026 PRADIP BIBHISHAN DIWANE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS ...

Advocate for the petitioner : Mr.G.J.Kore APP for Respondent-State : Mrs.J.P.Reddy Advocate for Respondent nos. 5 and 6 : Mr.Sujit A. Patil ...

CORAM :

SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

DATE :

11.06.2026 P. C. :

1] Heard rival parties.

2] The present Writ Petition is filed for seeking writ of habeas corpus against the respondent nos.1 to 4 by the petitioner to produce his wife, namely, Sanskruti Khanderao Bhatlavande @ Sanskruti Pradip Diwane.

3] The record shows that on 29th May, 2026 wife of the petitioner, namely, Sanskruti Khanderao Bhatlavande @ Sanskruti Pradip Diwane was brought before the Vacation Court and at that time during interaction she was not ready to go with petitioner - husband and preferred to stay with her parents only, for continuing her studies.

648.26WP 4] Today also when wife of the petitioner, namely, Sanskruti Khanderao Bhatlavande @ Sanskruti Pradip Diwane is brought before this Court, she reiterated the same facts as narrated earlier. The learned Judge of the Vacation Court under order dated 29th May, 2026 has already observed that it is not fit case for issuance of writ of habeas corpus since wife of the petitioner, namely, Sanskruti Khanderao Bhatlavande @ Sanskruti Pradip Diwane wanted to reside with her parents. There is no dispute that Sanskruti Khanderao Bhatlavande @ Sanskruti Pradip Diwane has attained majority, and therefore, she is definitely entitled to reside anywhere as per her own choice.

5] In view of the same, it is not fit case for issuance of writ of habeas corpus as prayed by the petitioner. As such, Criminal Writ Petition is dismissed and the same stands disposed of. [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J.] [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.] DDC