VICKY @ VIKKI VILAS KAMBLE vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Judgment text excerpt

Gokhale 1 of 12 903-wp-4283-25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4283 OF 2025 Vicky @ Vikky Vilas Kamble ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent __________ Mr. Mayuresh Ingale a/w. Rajesh Waghmare and Ishan Paradkar for Petitioner. Ms. Supriya Kak, APP for State/Respondent. __________ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ. DATE : 25 SEPTEMBER 2025 JUDGMENT : (PER SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with consent of the parties. 2. This petition is filed for release of the Petitioner in connection with C.R.No.92 of 2025 registered at Yerwada police station, Pune, because, according to the Petitioner, there was violation of Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India. According to the Petitioner, he was not produced before the nearest Magistrate within a period of 24 hours as was required under the said Article. Digitally signed by VINOD VINOD BHASKAR BHASKAR GOKHALE GOKHALE Date: 2025.09.30 10:33:44 +0530 2 of 12 903-wp-4283-25 Consequently, there was violation of Section 58 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), as he was not produced before the nearest Magistrate within 24 hours of his arrest. The second ground for filing this petition was that, there was violation of Section 35(3) and Section 35(5) of the BNSS. 3. Heard Mr. Mayuresh Ingale, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms. Supriya Kak, learned APP for the State. 4. Before referring to the legal issues raised by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, it is necessary to mention the allegations in the F.I.R. The Affidavit in reply filed by the Police Inspector (Crimes), Yerwada police station, Pune, mentions those facts in paragraph-5. The F.I.R. was registered