4 Jul 2025
Order issued
ConcludedThe High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad recorded adverse findings against police personnel.
adverse finding compensation.
Source: CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.457 OF 2025
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2025-0064Parbhani, MaharashtraJudgment 4 July 2025
Parbhani Man vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others
The High Court examined the death of a detainee after the December 2024 Parbhani combing action and custody at Mondha Police Station. The High Court held that there was a gross violation of human rights and that the deceased died due to the police authorities. The High Court held that a cognizable offence was made out but the petitioner's FIR was not recorded. The High Court directed registration of an FIR on the complaint dated 18.12.2024 and a Deputy Superintendent-level probe.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 4 July 2025 in CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.457 OF 2025, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad (Coram: Vibha Kankanwadi, Sanjay A. Deshmukh, JJ.) adjudicated the matter concerning 3 police personnel, namely: Police Inspector, Mondha Police Station, Parbhani; Superintendent of Police, Parbhani; Deputy Superintendent of Police, Parbhani.
- Register number
- MH 22 CW 0001
- Case reference
- CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.457 OF 2025
- Court and date
- High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad (Coram: Vibha Kankanwadi, Sanjay A. Deshmukh, JJ.), 4 July 2025
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police Inspector, Mondha Police Station, Parbhani; Superintendent of Police, Parbhani; Deputy Superintendent of Police, Parbhani
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “When the petitioner went to police station and tried to lodge the FIR, her FIR was not recorded.” (at para para 12)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Adverse finding.
- Present status of the proceedings
- The judgment is recent and may be subject to appeal; the pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
Judgment dated 4 July 2025. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
Custodial deathPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“When the petitioner went to police station and tried to lodge the FIR, her FIR was not recorded.” (para para 12)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
24 Sep 2026
(Swarm scout and independent verification pass (Muse Spark).)
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.