Bombay High Court
WP/160/2026 of SMT. ZUMBARBAI CHIGARYA BHOSALE Vs MAHARASHTRA STATE HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION AND ORS. on 15 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 160 OF 2026 Smt. Zumbarbai Chigarya Bhosale … Petitioner Versus Maharashtra State Human Right Commission And Ors. … Respondents
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 160 OF 2026
Smt. Zumbarbai Chigarya Bhosale
… Petitioner
Versus
Maharashtra State Human
Right Commission And Ors.
… Respondents
_______________________________________________________________
Mr. Onkar Mane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. S. S. Chaudhari, APP for the Respondent – State.
_______________________________________________________________
CORAM :
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 15th October, 2026.
P.C. :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. By the present Petition, the Petitioner has sought for the following substantive relief in terms of prayer clause (a):- (a) This Honourable Court be pleased to call for the record and proceeding of order and judgment passed by respondent no. 1 Maharashtra State Human Right Commission dated 11/09/2025 in Case No. 4798/13/28/2024 and after going through the same and satisfying about the legality, validity and propriety of the same be pleased to quash and set aside and allowed the said application.
2. Mr. S. S. Chaudhari, learned APP for the Respondent – State, refers to the order dated 11.09.2025, passed by the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission, Mumbai, in Case No. 4798/13/28/2024, more particularly, paragraph no. 5, which is reproduced herein below in verbatim :-
5. The advocate of the complainant and nothing more to say and expressed satisfaction over the action taken by the Police. Arjun
3. Mr. S. S. Chaudhari, learned APP for the Respondent – State, by referring to the above mentioned paragraph, submits that this Petition will have to be dismissed.
4. Faced with the said objection, Mr. Onkar Mane, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, seeks leave to withdraw the present Petition with liberty to file appropriate Application before the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission.
5. The request made by Mr. Onkar Mane, learned Advocate for the Petitioner is not opposed by Mr. S. S. Chaudhari, learned APP for the Respondent – State.
6. In view of the statement made by Mr. Onkar Mane, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, leave is granted to withdraw the present Petition with liberty as prayed.
7. If any Application is filed by the Petitioner before the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission, same be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law. Arjun
8. Writ Petition No. 160 of 2026, is disposed of.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Arjun