CW-2003-0016Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, MaharashtraJudgment 13 March 2003

Aurangabad Man vs State of Maharashtra & Ors.

The judgment of the Bombay High Court records the following account. Replace 'with a B Summary sought' with 'and moved the Magistrate for discharge of the petitioner (para 8)'. The judgment never uses the term 'B Summary'. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

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 →

Report card

By judgment dated 13 March 2003 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 431 of 2001, the Bombay High Court (Coram: B.B. Vagyani, J., A.S. Bagga, J., JJ.) returned findings adverse to the Police personnel, City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 25,000.

Register number
MH 20 CW 0002
Case reference
Criminal Writ Petition No. 431 of 2001 / (2003) 105 BOMLR 302; 2003(2) ALD (Cri) 82
Court and date
Bombay High Court (Coram: B.B. Vagyani, J., A.S. Bagga, J., JJ.), 13 March 2003
Officer(s) at the material time
Police personnel, City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Article 21 of the Constitution of India; Article 22 of the Constitution of India; Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Finding of the Court (extract)
“Having examined the case of the petitioner, in the light of the pronouncements of the Supreme Court referred above, we are of the clear opinion that the arrest and detention of the petitioner was unjustified. The arrest and detention of …” (at para 28)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 25,000.
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Bombay High Court judgment dated 13 March 2003 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
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.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“Having examined the case of the petitioner, in the light of the pronouncements of the Supreme Court referred above, we are of the clear opinion that the arrest and detention of the petitioner was unjustified. The arrest and detention of …” (para 28)

Institutional response

1
13 Mar 2003

Order issued

Concluded
Bombay High Court External · Binding

The Bombay High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 25,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: (2003) 105 BOMLR 302; 2003(2) ALD (Cri) 82
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.