IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2427 OF 2026 Manohar Jagannath Jadhav .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Home Department and Ors. .. Respondents Mr. Tanveer Patel (through V.C.), i/by Mr. Asif Chaware, Advocates for the Petitioner. Ms. Pallavi N. Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent-State of Maharashtra. CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ. & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. DATE : 27th July, 2026. [ THROUGH HYBRID HEARING ] P.C. : 1. We have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner for quite some time. We have perused the complaint on the basis of which the Petitioner alleges an offence under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. There is no mention of any utterances in the complaint shown to us, that would invite the provisions of the 1989 Act, for constituting an offence. 2. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits on 1/2 12-WP-2427-2026.odt Dixit instructions that the Petitioner desires to withdraw this Petition and intends to file a complaint under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 3. In view of the above statement, this Petition is disposed off as withdrawn on instructions. If the Petitioner avails of a remedy under the provisions of the B.N.S.S., all contentions of all the parties are kept open. [ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ] Digitally

by 2/2 SNEHASNEHA signed ABHAY DIXIT 12-WP-2427-2026.odt DixitABHAY Date: 2026.07.28DIXIT 16:48:07 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2427 OF 2026 Manohar Jagannath Jadhav .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Home Department and Ors. .. Respondents Mr. Tanveer Patel (through V.C.), i/by Mr. Asif Chaware, Advocates for the Petitioner. Ms. Pallavi N. Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent-State of Maharashtra. CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ. & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. DATE : 27th July, 2026. [ THROUGH HYBRID HEARING ] P.C. : 1. We have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner for quite some time. We have perused the complaint on the basis of which the Petitioner alleges an offence under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. There is no mention of any utterances in the complaint shown to us, that would invite the provisions of the 1989 Act, for constituting an offence. 2. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits on 1/2 12-WP-2427-2026.odt Dixit instructions that the Petitioner desires to withdraw this Petition and intends to file a complaint under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 3. In view of the above statement, this Petition is disposed off as withdrawn on instructions. If the Petitioner avails of a remedy under the provisions of the B.N.S.S., all contentions of all the parties are kept open. [ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ] Digitally

by 2/2 SNEHASNEHA signed ABHAY DIXIT 12-WP-2427-2026.odt DixitABHAY Date: 2026.07.28DIXIT 16:48:07 +0530