Archive · 23 Sep 2026
Bombay High Court Quashes Threat Case Over Driving Licence Footage
A man was stopped by a police constable who kept his driving licence.
The man said the constable wanted Rs 300 to give it back.
Police instead accused the man of grabbing the constable and making threats.
The man denied doing this and showed a mobile-phone recording.
The court also looked at WhatsApp messages involving police officers.
These materials appeared to support the man’s story.
The court said the police case looked false and cancelled the criminal proceedings.
It also said the licence should be returned if police had taken it.
The Bombay High Court quashed a criminal case against a man accused of threatening a police constable.
The man said the constable demanded Rs 300 to return his driving licence, while the prosecution accused him of threatening and grabbing the constable.
Justice Milind Jadhav found mobile footage and WhatsApp messages prima facie supported the man’s account.
The court described the prosecution’s case as appearing “false and concocted” and “completely unbelievable.”
The court also noted that police-station CCTV footage was unavailable and directed that the licence be returned if it had been confiscated.
- Who
- The Bombay High Court, Justice Milind Jadhav, an unnamed jewellery-business owner, and a police constable were involved.
- What
- The court quashed a criminal case alleging that the man threatened a constable.
- When
- September 22, 2026.
- Where
- The case was decided by the Bombay High Court in Mumbai.
- Why
- The court found that mobile footage, WhatsApp messages, and other material prima facie supported the man’s claim that the constable demanded money for returning his driving licence.
Applicant’s account
Prosecution’s account
What happened during the stop
Applicant’s account
The applicant said the constable retained his driving licence and demanded Rs 300 to return it, or threatened a Rs 500 penalty for riding without a helmet.
Prosecution’s account
The prosecution said the applicant misbehaved, caught the constable by the collar, and threatened him.
Conduct at the police station
Applicant’s account
The applicant claimed he went to file a non-cognisable complaint against the constable but was detained.
Prosecution’s account
The prosecution did not provide available CCTV footage that could have clarified what happened at the station.
Court’s assessment
Applicant’s account
The applicant relied on mobile footage and WhatsApp messages to support his version.
Prosecution’s account
The court found the prosecution’s version prima facie false and concocted, noting inconsistencies in the constable’s statement.
- Court
- Bombay High Court
- Judge
- Justice Milind Jadhav
- Disputed payment
- The man alleged that Rs 300 was demanded to return his driving licence.
- Alternative penalty alleged
- The man said he was threatened with either a Rs 500 helmet-related penalty or payment of Rs 300.
- Evidence considered
- A mobile-phone recording and WhatsApp conversations involving police personnel and senior officers.
- Missing evidence
- Police-station CCTV footage that could have shown what happened was unavailable.
- Outcome
- The chargesheet and all proceedings were quashed, and the licence was ordered returned if confiscated.