BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH : NAGPURCRIMINAL APPLICATION(APL) NO. 1070 OF 2026 (Hameed Yakub Isani v. State of Maharashtra through Police Station officer & Anr.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
All the applications are allowed in the above terms and disposed of
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 123, 188, 223, 272, 273, 274, 275, 328
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 123, 223, 274, 275
- Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 ss. 3(1)(zz)(iv), 26(1), 26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), 27(3)(e), 30(2)(a), 59
Judgment
1 / 4 11A apl 770-25 common orderIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH : NAGPURCRIMINAL APPLICATION(APL) NO. 1070 OF 2026 (Hameed Yakub Isani Vs. State of Maharashtra through Police Station officer, Ousad Police Station, Pusad Dist. Yavatmal) WITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION(APL) NO.1058 OF 2026 (Shazad Khan Akbar Khan Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr. through PoliceStation officer, Vasant Nagar Police Station, Nagpur(City) Dist. Yavatmal andanr.)WITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION(APL) NO.1078 OF 2026 (Rajendra Mahadevrao Thombare Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr. throughPolice Station officer, Nandanwan Police Station, Nagpur(City) Dist. Nagpurand anr.)WITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION(APL) NO.770 OF 2025(Hamid Yakub Isani Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr. through Police Stationofficer, Vasant Nagar Police Station, Nagpur(City) Dist. Yavatmal and anr.)----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Office notes, Office Memoranda ofCoram, appearances, Court's orders, Court's or Judge's Orders.or directions and Registrar's orders.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mr.S.A.Mohta counsel for the applicants.Mr. N.S.Autkar, APP for the State. CORAM: MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.DATE: 06/05/2026Common order 1. The facts of the present applications arise out of separate incidents; the common legal issue involved in all the matters is covered by thejudgment of this Court in Criminal Application (APL) No.1776 of 2025.(Mohammad Bilal Moammad Yakub and anrs Vs. State ofmaharashtra and anrs.) decided on 24/04/2026. Therefore, in view of theKavita 2 / 4 11A apl 770-25 common orderobservations made therein, the respective FIRs, charge-sheets andconsequential criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants deserveto be quashed and set aside; all these applications are decided by a commonorder.2. The applicants in the present applications have approached thisCourt for quashing and setting aside the offences registered against thempunishable under Sections 188, 272, 273 and 328 of the Indian Penal Codeand Sections 123, 223, 274 and 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alongwith Sections 26(1), 26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), 27(3)(e), 30(2)(a), 3(1)(zz)(iv) and 59 ofthe Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 read with the Food Safety andStandards Rules, 2011. 3. The contraband articles were seized upon receipt of information, andthereafter a complaint was lodged by the complainant, namely the FoodSafety Inspector. Offences under the relevant provisions of the Indian PenalCode were also registered against the applicants.4. In brief, the prosecution case across the present applications arisesout of separate incidents involving alleged possession, transportation, storage and sale of prohibited food articles in contravention of StateGovernment notifications. In Criminal Application No.770/2026, the caseoriginates from an incident dated 04/10/2022, wherein one accused wasapprehended near Naik Pharmacy College, Digras, while allegedly sellingcontraband tobacco from a motorcycle, and during inquiry disclosed thename of the applicant as supplier, leading to filing of charge-sheet dated28/08/2024; however, the implication of the applicant is stated to be basedsolely on disclosure, raising issues as to the existence of any prima faciematerial. In Criminal Application No.1058/2026, the prosecution relies onKavita 3 / 4 11A apl 770-25 common orderan incident dated 04/10/2023, wherein the applicant was allegedly foundtransporting prohibited food articles from a motorcycle near Digras Road, Pusad, followed by investigation and filing of a charge-sheet dated28/08/2024, culminating in Sessions Case No.95/2024, which is presentlysub judice. 5. In Criminal Application No.1078/2026, the allegations pertain to araid conducted on 28/01/2026 at a kirana shop of the applicant, whereprohibited food articles were allegedly found and seized pursuant to Statenotification dated 16/07/2025, forming the basis of the prosecution interalia. In Criminal Application No.1070/2026, the prosecution case arisesfrom a raid conducted on 18/01/2026 at a godown allegedly belonging tothe applicant near Madina Masjid, followed by registration of CrimeNo.95/2026 dated 03/02/2026 and there is no charge-sheet filed inCriminal Application No.1078 of 2026. In all the cases, the prosecutionproceeds on the footing that the applicants acted mens rea in contraventionof statutory provisions under the Indian Penal Code/Bharatiya NyayaSanhita and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the present issue iscovered by the judgment of this Court in Criminal Application (APL) No.1776 of 2025. It was contended that, in view of the observations madetherein, the provisions of the Indian Penal Code would not be attracted whena special enactment governs the field. Furthermore, it was argued that themandatory procedure prescribed under the Food Safety and Standards Act,2006, was not followed while registering the FIR.Kavita 4 / 4 11A apl 770-25 common order7. In view of the observations made by this Court in CriminalApplication (APL) No.1776 of 2025 (Mohammad Bilal Moammad Yakuband anrs Vs. State of maharashtra and anrs.) decided on 24/04/2026:-FIR No. 450/2023 and Session no. 95/2024 (registered with PoliceStation Vasant Nagar, District Yavatmal)FIR vide crime no. 95/2026 and RCC no. 102/2026 (Police StationPusad Shahar, District Yavatmal)FIR No. 48/2026 herein the charge sheet has not been filed withconnection with crime no.48/2026 (Police Station Nandanvan, District Nagpur,)FIR vide crime 450/2023 and session case 95/2024 (registered withPolice Station Vasant Nagar, District Yavatmal)All the above stated charge-sheets and First Information Reportslodged under sections 123, 223, 274 and 275 of IPC and punishable undersections 26 (2) (i), 26 (2) (iv), 27 (3) (e), 3(1)(zz), (iv) and 59 of the Food Safetyand Standards Rules are hereby quashed and set aside.8. All the applications are allowed in the above terms and disposed of. JUDGEKavita
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: All the applications are allowed in the above terms and disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 123, 188, 223, 272, 273, 274, 275, 328; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 123, 223, 274, 275; Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 — ss. 3(1)(zz)(iv), 26(1), 26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), 27(3)(e), 30(2)(a), 59.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Supreme Court of India, on 24 Apr 2026. The bench was VRUSHALI V JOSHI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.