The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has quashed an FIR filed under the Maharashtra anti-black magic law, holding that mere allegations of sprinkling white mustard outside a house do not constitute a criminal offence. The Court found both lack of evidence and absence of legal ingredients required under the statute.
Background of the Case
The case arose from FIR No. 0343/2025 registered at CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad. The complainant alleged that white mustard seeds were found scattered outside his house early in the morning. CCTV footage from a neighbour allegedly showed a motorcycle passing by, which was registered in the applicant’s name.
Based on this, the applicant, a 65-year-old resident of Aurangabad, was booked under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and Other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013. A chargesheet was later filed, and trial proceedings had begun before a magistrate court.
The applicant approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR and proceedings.
Justice S. G. Chapalgaonkar closely examined both the FIR and the material collected during investigation. The Court noted serious gaps in evidence, particularly regarding identification of the accused.
“The statement of the neighbour, who was the custodian of the CCTV footage, was not recorded,” the Court observed, pointing out that the prosecution relied only on the vehicle’s registration.
The judge further noted that the footage only showed a helmeted rider, making it impossible to conclusively identify the applicant as the person involved.
More importantly, the Court examined whether the alleged act itself constituted an offence under the 2013 Act. It clarified that Section 3(2) applies only to acts involving human sacrifice, black magic practices, or actions done with intent to deceive, exploit, or create fear through claims of supernatural powers.
“Mere allegation of sprinkling white mustard… without explaining intention behind such act… cannot be brought within the purview of the offence,” the Court held.
The Court also referred to the detailed schedule under the Act, which lists specific prohibited practices such as claiming supernatural powers, exploiting people through fear, or performing harmful rituals. It found that the present allegations did not match any of those categories.
The Court took note of a parallel matrimonial dispute involving the applicant’s family. It observed a “close semblance” between the timing of the FIR and the settlement of that dispute, suggesting the possibility of the complaint being filed due to personal grievances.
Relying on principles laid down in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, the Court emphasized that criminal proceedings can be quashed where allegations do not disclose any offence or appear to be malicious.
Finding that the allegations, even if accepted at face value, did not constitute an offence under the law, and that evidence was insufficient to establish identity, the Court invoked its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The criminal application was allowed, and the FIR along with the related proceedings were quashed.
Case Details
Case Title: Gajanan Kashiram Shekokar vs State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Case Number: Criminal Application No. 3109 of 2025
Judge: Justice S. G. Chapalgaonkar
Decision Date: April 20, 2026
