Pratik Bhanudas More v. State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.408 OF 2026 Mahesh Mangal Ghare, ] R/o. Umroli, Tal. Karjat, Dist. Raigad ] .. Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Maharashtra, ] Through Department of Home ]

2. Police Inspector, ] Karjat Police Station, Dist. Raigad ]

3. Superintendent of Police, Raigad, ] Alibagh, Dist. Raigad ]

4. Omkar Dilip Kismatrao, ] R/o. Chauk, Tal. Khalapur, Dist. Raigad ]

5. Vishnu Narayan Thanage, ] R/o. Ashane, Tal. Karjat, Dist. Raigad ]

6. Subhash Zavaru Ghare, ] R/o. Tal. Karjat, Dist. Raigad ]

7. Bhagwan Zavaru Ghare, ] R/o. Umroli, Tal. Karjat, Dist. Raigad ] .. Respondents Mr. Keshav Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S.V. Gavand, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1-State of Maharashtra.

CORAM : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ. & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

DATE : 2ND FEBRUARY 2026.

PER, GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:

"a. Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent nos.1 to 3 to register an FIR forthwith on the basis of the petitioner's complaints dated 10th December 2025;

b.

Direct an independent and transparent investigation by a senior officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police or any other independent agency deemed fit;

1/2 12-WP-408-2026.doc Dixit

c.

Direct preservation and seizure of all revenue, acquisition and compensation records relating to the subject lands; d.

Direct initiation of departmental and criminal action against erring public servants found involved."

2.

Mr. Keshav Patil learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner's ancestors were owners of agricultural lands situated at village Ashane, Taluka Karjat, District Raigad. These lands were cultivated jointly and the names of the petitioner's ancestors were recorded as protected tenants pursuant to Mutation Entry No. 128 of village Ashane. It is contended that disputes arose among family members in or about 1991 concerning rights over the ancestral property. Despite objections, certain mutation entries came to be altered in the revenue records. This resulted in multiple civil proceedings, including appeals before the Collector in respect of the revenue entries and Regular Civil Suit No. 69 of 2020, which is presently pending before the competent Civil Court at Karjat. Allegations are also made that the respondent nos. 4 to 7 acted in collusion with government officials and forged documents to secure the changes in the land records.

3.

Upon perusal of the record, we find that the controversy pertains to disputed questions of title and correctness of revenue entries. The petitioner has already availed appropriate civil remedies and the same are pending. The petitioner has an efficacious alternate remedy in law if an FIR is not registered by the police. Consequently, Writ Petition no. 408 of 2026 is dismissed as being devoid of merits. It is clarified that we have not examined the merits of the matter.

[ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ] Digitally signed by SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT Date:

2026.03.05 16:11:35 +0530 2/2 12-WP-408-2026.doc Dixit SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT