The petitioners raised one more objection that impugned directions would result into registration of two independent proceedings for one and the same offence, as directions are given to Collector to lodge FIR/police report and further directions are given to Assistant Superintendent of Court to file separate complaints with Judicial Magistrate. This Court finds that aforesaid objection is fallacious. On the basis of evidence led during course of trial, Reference Court noticed that manipulated reference letter and documents were used on record of Court for presentation, registration of prosecution of land acquisition references and offences of preparation of false or manipulated documents are committed before presentation of references in connivance with many other persons, who are not parties to petition or directly involved in prosecution of references. In that backdrop, for offence covered under Section 215(1)(b) of BNSS, 2023, directions are given to Assistant Superintendent of Court to file separate complaints with Magistrate and for offences which are committed outside Court prior to presentation of references, directions are given to Collector to lodge FIR/police report. In this backdrop, in light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Iqbal Singh Marwah (supra), Reference Court formed opinion regarding commission of offence referred under Section 195(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. (Section 215(1)(b) of BNSS, 2023) and followed further procedure and left Collector to lodge FIR in respect of offences which are not committed on record of Court. This Court finds no fault in course adopted by Reference Court while issuing two different directions. {Para 20}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)
Writ Petition No. 1676 of 2026
Decided On: 06.05.2026
Raghunath and Ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.G. Chapalgaonkar, J.
Citation: 2026:BHC-AUG:21519,MANU/MH/4472/2026
Print Page