Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shyam Pathak vs Station House Officer on 24 November, 2022

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

                                                                         1
                                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                                      BEFORE
                                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                             ON THE 24th OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                                                          WRIT PETITION No. 22844 of 2022

                                               BETWEEN:-
                                               SHYAM PATHAK S/O V.D. PATHAK, AGED
                                               ABOUT       47      YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                               AGRICULTURIST H.NO. 476 MIG, G SECTOR
                                               AYODHYA   NAGAR     BHOPAL    (MADHYA
                                               PRADESH)

                                                                                                      .....PETITIONER
                                               (BY SHRI MAHESH KUMAR LODHI - ADVOCATE)

                                               AND
                                       1.      STATION HOUSE OFFICER POLICE STATION
                                               ASHBAGH BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       2.      COMMISSIONER OF POLICE NEW CONTROL
                                               R OOM MALVIYA NAGAR, BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                               PRADESH)

                                       3.      DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE POLICE
                                               HEADQUARTER BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                   .....RESPONDENTS
                                               (BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                             This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                                       following:
                                                                          ORDER

Petitioner's only grievance is that petitioner's son, namely, Tanay Pathak was assaulted by accused persons and, therefore, case crime No.396/2022 was registered at Police Station Aishbagh, District Bhopal for offence under Signature Not Verified SAN Sections 292, 294, 323, 506, 34 of IPC against the accused persons.

Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL Date: 2022.11.25 15:10:54 IST

It is submitted by Shri Mahesh Kumar Lodhi, learned counsel for the 2 petitioner that CCTV footage of the house of Bhupendra Sharma, where the incident took place and son of the petitioner was beaten is a vital link for the prosecution evidence but, authorities of police have yet not seized the relevant CCTV footage. Therefore, a direction be given to police authorities to secure and preserve the CCTV footage to be produced before the trial Court at an appropriate time as per the directions of the concerned Court.

Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Government Advocate for the respondents-State, on instructions from the concerned Police Station, submits that the concerned camera located at House No.B-17, which is the house of accused Pratyush Dixit was found to be non-operational when it was examined by Technician Shri Faizal Ali. Therefore, it is submitted that no indulgence can be shown in the matter.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that police shall seize that camera and complete equipment and if need so arise or on moving an appropriate application by the complainant, shall carry out forensic examination of the said camera and DVR at an appropriate stage. It will keep the camera and DVR in its custody.

With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE pp Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL Date: 2022.11.25 15:10:54 IST