7 Apr 2025
Order issued
ConcludedThe High Court of Judicature at Bombay recorded adverse findings against police personnel.
adverse finding compensation.
Source: CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4107 OF 2024
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2025-0065Thane, MaharashtraJudgment 7 April 2025
Thane Man vs The State Of Maharashtra
The High Court examined the police-van shooting death of an undertrial being escorted by a Thane Crime Branch team. The High Court held that the starting point of investigation, registration of an FIR, was itself not complied with. The High Court held that the PUCL guidelines on encounter investigations were cited only to be ignored by the State. The High Court held that refusal to investigate undermines the rule of law and ordered a fresh SIT 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 7 April 2025 in CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4107 OF 2024, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Coram: Revati Mohite Dere, Neela Gokhale, JJ.) adjudicated the matter concerning 3 police personnel, namely: Superintendent of Police, State CID; Joint Commissioner of Police, Crime, Mumbai; Deputy Commissioner of Police, Thane Crime Branch.
- Register number
- MH 04 CW 0015
- Case reference
- CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4107 OF 2024
- Court and date
- High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Coram: Revati Mohite Dere, Neela Gokhale, JJ.), 7 April 2025
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Superintendent of Police, State CID; Joint Commissioner of Police, Crime, Mumbai; Deputy Commissioner of Police, Thane Crime Branch
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The starting point of any investigation i.e, registration of an FIR itself is not complied with.” (at para para 19)
- 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 7 April 2025. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
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.
“The starting point of any investigation i.e, registration of an FIR itself is not complied with.” (para para 19)
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.