SHEKHAR KAKASAHEB JAGTAP Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In compliance of the order dtd. 3/11/2025 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.17480 of 2025, the writ petitions vide Writ Petition Nos.3839 of 2024 and 722 of 2024 filed by Shekhar Jagtap were listed for hearing on 18 th November, 2025 before a Bench constituting the Chief Justice of the High Court of Bombay. On that day, the other Writ Petitions and Criminal Application arising out of the same First Information Reports were also listed together along with the aforesaid Writ Petitions filed by Shekhar Jagtap. These Writ Petitions and Criminal Application have been heard on different dates and reserved for judgment on 21 st January, 2026.

(2.) Criminal Writ Petition No. 3839 of 2024 seeks quashing of the First Information Report bearing CR No. 742 of 2024 registered on 26/8/2024 at Thane Nagar PS on the allegation of commission of the offences under Sec. 166A, 120B, 170, 193, 195, 199, 203, 205, 207, 352, 355, 384, 389, 465, 466, 471 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant, namely, Sanjay Mishrimal Punamiya who claims to be a permanent resident of the City of Mumbai stated that Sanjay Pandey, Shekhar Jagtap, ACP Sardar Patil, PI Manohar Patil, Shyamsundar Agarwal, Shubham Agarwal and Sharad Agarwal were involved in commission of the aforesaid crime in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy hatched by them with their unknown associates. Criminal Writ Petition No. 722 of 2024 has been filed by Shekhar Jagtap for quashing of CR No. 46 of 2024 registered on 3 rdMarch 2024 at Colaba PS on a written complaint given by Sanjay Mishrimal Punamiya alleging commission of certain offences by Shekhar Jagtap, Shyamsundar Agarwal, Sharad Agarwal, Kishor Bhalerao and their associates. In his complaint dtd. 3/3/2024, Sanjay Mishrimal Punamiya alleged commission of the offences under Sec. 170, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code by the aforesaid accused persons. With a similar prayer seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings against them, Kishor Shamrao Bhalerao, Shyamsundar R. Agarwal, Sharad M. Agarwal, Manohar Narsappa Patil, Sardar Namdeo Patil and Sanjay Pandey have also approached this Court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Criminal Application No.1140 of 2024 has been filed by Sanjay Pandey under sec. 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

(3.) The complainant who is the second respondent states that there were criminal cases lodged against him which are either pending investigation or a charge-sheet has been filed against him. He has also lodged criminal complaints against Shyamsundar Agarwal, Shekhar Jagtap, Chhota Shakeel and others, which are pending in different Courts. He extensively refers to the proceedings in CR No.299 of 2021 which was registered at the instance of Shyamsundar Agarwal at Marine Drive PS for the commission of offence on 20/10/2021 under Sec. 387, 388, 380, 403, 420, 423, 464, 465, 497, 468, 471, etc. In CR No. 46 of 2024, he alleges that he was arrested in CR No.299 of 2021 and Shekhar Jagtap appeared on behalf of Shyamsundar Agarwal in the Court of 8th Metropolitan Magistrate Killa Court, Mumbai but, at the same time, Shekhar Jagtap pressed for his second remand on 29/7/2021 in his capacity as Special Public Prosecutor. He further alleges that Shekhar Jagtap appeared as Special Public Prosecutor in other cases also including the proceedings of Criminal Writ Petition No.2646 of 2023 which was filed by Akbar Pathan seeking quashing of CR No.299 of 2021. Making further allegations against Shekhar Jagtap, the second respondent states that the application filed by the Investigating Officer for obtaining voice sample of Chhota Shakeel in CR No.35 of 2021 was dismissed on 5/1/2022. In that case, Shekhar Jagtap appeared for the State of Maharashtra without any permission and ensured that the application for voice sample of Chhota Shakeel is rejected so as to save Shyamsundar Agarwal in the said case. Constrained, he filed a Miscellaneous Application in the Sessions Court for obtaining the voice sample of Chhota Shakeel and Shekhar Jagtap again appeared in the said case as Special Public Prosecutor and opposed the said application. In CR No.176 of 2021, which was filed on 23 rd July, 2021 at Kopri PS by Sharad Agarwal who is a relative of Shyamsundar Agarwal, Shekhar Jagtap opposed his pre-bail application and also appeared in Bail Application No.2812 of 2021 filed by him and made false statement that he is the Special Public Prosecutor. He also appeared without any authority in CR No.365 of 2021 which was registered under Sec. 379 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, sec. 72 of the Information Technology Act and sec. 21 of the Indian Telegraph Act.