Bombay HC: Plot Allotment Charges Against Non-Government Worker Dismissed

Here's a breakdown of what happened in the case involving Namrata Pawar and the alleged plot allotment issues.

Background of the Case

Namrata Pawar, a 35-year-old from Jalgaon, was accused of being involved in problems related to the distribution of industrial plots in the Nardana Industrial Area, Sindhkheda, Dhule. The complaint was initially filed by Krishna Kumar More, a lawyer from Dhule, who claimed that Pawar and others teamed up with officials from the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) to commit cheating and make fake documents.

Legal Journey

• Initial Orders: On May 6, 2025, a local judge in Sindhkheda ordered an investigation into the claims. This was confirmed by a higher judge in Dhule on May 31, 2025.
• Appeal to High Court: Namrata Pawar took these orders to the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, arguing that the orders were made without proper reasoning.

Key Arguments

• For Namrata Pawar: Her lawyer, Mr. V. D. Sapkal, argued that the judge's order was incorrect as it didn't follow the right legal steps. The order was made without a needed report from a higher officer, which is required to protect government workers from false claims.

• Against Namrata Pawar: The complainant's lawyer, Mr. Mohit S. Shah, argued that Pawar wasn't a government worker because she wasn't appointed by the state. Therefore, the protections for government workers didn't apply.

Court's Decision

• Judgment Date: The decision was announced on November 10, 2025, by Justice Sachin S. Deshmukh.
• Outcome: The High Court canceled the orders for investigation and the filing of the crime. It found that the judge had made a mistake by ordering charges without following the correct steps.

Legal Principles Cited

• The court stressed the need for a higher officer's report before proceeding against a government worker, as stated in Section 175 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
• It was noted that not following these legal requirements made the judge's order invalid.

Summary of the Verdict

The High Court's decision highlighted the importance of following legal rules to protect government workers from false accusations. The case shows the challenges in figuring out who is a government worker under the law.

Justice Deshmukh emphasized that legal rules cannot be ignored as attempted by the complainant.