2 Sep 2026
Order issued
ConcludedThe High Court of Judicature at Bombay recorded adverse findings against police personnel.
adverse finding compensation.
Source: WRIT PETITION NO. 4381 OF 2026
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2026-0070Mumbai, MaharashtraJudgment 2 September 2026
Mumbai Woman vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors
The High Court held that the petitioner's custody in C.R. No. 1285 of 2026 of Juhu Police Station violated Section 43(5) of the BNSS. The High Court held that the arrest documents did not show the signature of any woman police officer. The High Court ordered that the petitioner be released forthwith in connection with the said case. The High Court declined to grant compensation or damages.
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 2 September 2026 in WRIT PETITION NO. 4381 OF 2026, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Coram: Sarang V. Kotwal, Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale, JJ.) adjudicated the matter concerning 2 police personnel, namely: Senior Inspector of Police, Anti-Extortion Cell, D.C.B., C.I.D., Mumbai; Police Sub-Inspector, Anti-Extortion Cell, D.C.B., C.I.D., Mumbai.
- Register number
- MH 01 CW 0052
- Case reference
- WRIT PETITION NO. 4381 OF 2026
- Court and date
- High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Coram: Sarang V. Kotwal, Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale, JJ.), 2 September 2026
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Senior Inspector of Police, Anti-Extortion Cell, D.C.B., C.I.D., Mumbai; Police Sub-Inspector, Anti-Extortion Cell, D.C.B., C.I.D., Mumbai
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 43(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Thus, from the record we find that, there is a violation of Section 43(5) of BNSS.” (at para para 10)
- 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 2 September 2026. 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.
“Thus, from the record we find that, there is a violation of Section 43(5) of BNSS.” (para para 10)
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.