CW-2024-0013Mumbai Suburban, MaharashtraJudgment 22 August 2024

Mumbai Man vs State of Maharashtra

The judgment of the Bombay High Court records the following account. Thane journalist Abhijit Padale was arrested on 15 January 2022 within hours of an FIR under ss. 384/506 IPC, without service of the section 41A notice and without recorded reasons, and remained in custody till bail on 18 January 2022. The court found the arrest mechanical and in stark violation of the CrPC mandate and Arnesh Kumar guidelines, unnecessarily curtailing his liberty. It declared the arrest illegal, awarded Rs 25,000 compensation recoverable from the officers found responsible, and ordered a DCP-rank departmental enquiry. The petitioner is a journalist; the offences carried maximum sentences below seven years. 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 22 August 2024 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 1197/2022, the Bombay High Court (Coram: Revati Mohite Dere, Prithviraj Chavan, JJ.) returned findings adverse to the Police officers (arresting officers), Vakola Police Station, Mumbai, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 25,000.

Register number
MH 01 CW 0043
Case reference
Criminal Writ Petition No. 1197/2022 / 2024:BHC-AS:34257-DB
Court and date
Bombay High Court (Coram: Revati Mohite Dere, Prithviraj Chavan, JJ.), 22 August 2024
Officer(s) at the material time
Police officers (arresting officers), Vakola Police Station, Mumbai
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“As the Police failed to follow the mandate of the Cr.P.C. and obey the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra), the arrest of the Petitioner was not legal.” (at para 12)
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 22 August 2024 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.

“As the Police failed to follow the mandate of the Cr.P.C. and obey the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra), the arrest of the Petitioner was not legal.” (para 12)

Institutional response

1
22 Aug 2024

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: 2024:BHC-AS:34257-DB
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.