Authority: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction

Order Date: 22 October 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Bipin Satish Chandra Agrwal, 49‑year‑old Indian citizen engaged in import‑export of garments, acting as constituted attorney for his mother‑in‑law Smt. Asawari K. Kulkarni in a redevelopment dispute of ‘The New Aarti Co‑operative Housing Society’, Andheri East, Mumbai.
  • Respondents: State of Maharashtra; Sub‑Inspector Mahesh Lamkhade, Azad Maidan Police Station, Mumbai.
  • Intervener/Developer: M/s. Seth and Sonal Developers (partners Bhavesh Seth and Kamlesh Vora) who filed FIR No. 243 of 2017 alleging extortion under IPC Sec. 384.
  • Incident Timeline: On 4 August 2017 Agrwal met developers, received an advance of Rs 2,00,000, was handcuffed and arrested by police; FIR and arrest form dated 4‑5 August 2017; notice under CrPC Sec. 41A served at 8:20 pm on the same day.
  • Custody Details: Police custody from 4‑8 August 2017; judicial custody from 8‑24 August 2017; bail granted by Sessions Court on 28 August 2017 on Rs 25,000.
  • Petitioner’s Contentions: Arrest illegal; no prior notice; FIR filed after arrest; arrest form dates overwritten; blanks in medical examination and grounds of arrest; station diary entries show procedural lapses; voice‑sample forensic report prepared on same day (18 Oct 2017) contrary to normal practice; non‑compliance with Supreme Court directions in Sudhir Choudhary case; overall collusion between developer and police to suppress his lawful claims.
  • Respondents’ Contentions: Cited Bombay Police Manual, Rule 35, and case law (Satender Kumar Antil, Arnesh Kumar, Superintendent of Police v Tapan Kumar Singh) asserting legality of arrest and remand; claimed magistrate’s order ratified arrest.
  • Court’s Observations: Police colluded with developer, manipulated documents (overwritten dates, missing medical exam, blank grounds of arrest), failed to conduct preliminary inquiry, violated principles laid down in Arnesh Kumar; magistrate’s remand orders lacked reasons; forensic report suppressed; voice‑sample turnaround unrealistic; overall arrest deemed high‑handed, arbitrary, and malafide.

Final Outcome

  • The arrest of the petitioner on 4 August 2017 is declared unlawful and illegal.
  • The State of Maharashtra is ordered to pay Rs 5,00,000 compensation to the petitioner within two weeks of the order’s upload on the High Court website.
  • Sub‑Inspector Mahesh Lamkhade and all concerned officers are directed to face immediate suspension; salary recovery is advised.
  • The Registry is directed to place this judgment before the Administrative Committee of the Bombay High Court for action against the magistrates of the 64th Court who approved the remand and bail applications without proper justification.
  • Criminal Application No. 32 of 2018 is dismissed as it no longer survives; the petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

Topics: Illegal Arrest; Judicial Compensation; Police Misconduct