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 13, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Xyz vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 14 October, 2022

Author: Vibha Kankanwadi

Bench: Vibha Kankanwadi

                                                                 crwp1177.22
                                        1



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD


            CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1177 OF 2022



 X. Y. Z.
                                                         ...PETITIONER
        VERSUS

 1) The State of Maharashtra,
    Through its Secretary,
    Home Department,
    Mantralaya, Mumbai-32,

 2) The Superintendent of Police,
    Ahmednagar, Tq. & Dist-Ahmednagar,

 3) The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
    Karjat Division, Karjat, Tq-Karjat,
    Dist-Ahmednagar,

 4) The Police Inspector,
    Karjat Police Station,
    Tq-Karjat, Dist-Ahmednagar.
                                                         ...RESPONDENTS

                ...
    Mr.Rahul R. Karpe Advocate for Petitioner.
    Mr.R.V. Dasalkar, A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 to 4.
                ...

                CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
                       RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.


 DATE OF RESERVING ORDER                    :   28th SEPTEMBER 2022

 DATE OF PRONOUNCING ORDER :                    14th OCTOBER 2022



::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022                    ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                             crwp1177.22
                                   2




 ORDER [PER SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] :


 1.       Present Writ Petition invokes the constitutional powers of

 this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking

 directions for transfer of the investigation to the higher Police

 Authority. The Petition is filed by the informant, father of minor

 girl, who wants to get redressal of the grievances of his minor

 daughter, aged 10 years. According to the father and the victim

 girl, the girl has been ravished by two persons known to the girl.

 According to the informant, he belongs to Scheduled Tribe.



 2.       Heard Mr. Karpe, learned Advocate appearing for the

 petitioner and Mr. Dasalkar, learned APP appearing for the

 respondents.



 3.       Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that

 present Petition has been filed on 24 th August 2022, however,

 prior to that the petitioner was required to approach this Court

 by filing Criminal Writ Petition No.802 of 2022 for seeking

 registration of the First Information Report (for short "FIR") and

 after the notice was issued, FIR came to be lodged with the

 concerned Police Station vide Crime No.434 of 2022 on 20 th June


::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022               ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                           crwp1177.22
                                 3


 2022, in respect of an incident that had taken place on 28 th May

 2022, for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 376(d) of

 the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)

 (w), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2) of the Scheduled Castes and

 the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act as well as

 Section 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual

 Offences Act. However, the investigation has been carried out by

 the investigating officer in mala fide way and since the accused

 persons belong to the political parties having deep roots with the

 political heavy weights in the State, investigating agency instead

 of collecting the evidence on the basis of the allegations made by

 the informant and the victim, have tried to conduct the

 investigation in a direction, as to how the petitioner and the

 victim are stated to be colluding with an Advocate who had some

 financial transactions with the proposed accused. In fact one of

 the accused had given even the blank cheque to the petitioner

 for not to lodge the FIR and not to go ahead with the grievances.

 Respondent No.4, Police Inspector, Karjat Police Station was duty

 bound to register the FIR in respect of serious and heinous

 offence but he had not taken any steps and therefore the

 petitioner was required to approach this          Court. This also

 indicates as to how the accused persons are having man and



::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022             ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                                    crwp1177.22
                                       4


 muscle power in view of their political connection. After

 registration of the crime, investigation was handed over to

 Respondent No.3, however, he has also not collected the

 appropriate evidence. All these grievances were communicated

 in his complaint cum representation dated 24 th August 2022 by

 the petitioner to various authorities including Special Inspector

 General, Nashik, Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar. The

 Petitioner is having grievance as the Police are calling him now

 and then and obtaining his thumb impression on various

 documents. Even when petitioner has given evidence in the form

 of the photographs of the accused with the victim and also the

 video shooting, the Police Officer had damaged the Mobile and

 also torn the photographs. The petitioner is being threatened by

 the Police Officers that he would be sent to jail. Further, it is

 obvious from the point of view that during the pendency of this

 Petition      also     Respondent   No.3   has     hurriedly       done       some

 investigation and filed "B" Summary Report before the Special

 Court. In fact the statement of the victim under Section 161 of

 the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as Section 164 of the

 Code of Criminal Procedure ought to have been considered by

 the investigating officer. On the contrary, he has unnecessarily

 come with the case that there was some financial transaction



::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022                      ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                                     crwp1177.22
                                          5


 between one of the accused with the Advocate who was then

 representing the informant and objecting the bail application

 filed by the accused persons and he concluded that the tower

 location of the informant was at a different place, tower location

 of the accused was at a different place and since February 2022

 informant was not working with one of the accused. It is stated

 that a false FIR has been lodged. This is nothing but highhanded

 act     on    the     part    of   respondent   No.3   and      therefore,        the

 investigation needs to be handed over to some other officer of

 higher rank.



 4.       Per contra, the learned APP submitted with the support of

 the affidavit in reply filed by one Annasaheb Maruti Jadhav, the

 Investigating Officer i.e. Sub Divisional Police Officer, Karjat,

 Taluka-Karjat, District-Ahmednagar wherein it is stated that the

 investigation has been carried out and one of the accused, who

 is aged 75 years, was arrested on 23 rd June 2022. His medical

 examination has been done. Accused No.2 could not be arrested

 as he was not found. Medical examination of the girl is

 conducted. She is aged 16 years. The CCTV footage of Karjat

 Police Station would show that the informant had never come to

 the Police Station as alleged by him. In the Writ Petition when



::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022                       ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                           crwp1177.22
                                 6


 allegations were made that the accused offered blank cheque

 which was allegedly signed by son of one of the accused, it was

 revealed that said son, namely Sharad Kundlik Goykar, had

 lodged the FIR on 21st July 2022 against one Advocate Sumeet

 Kanhyalal Patil and Rahul Kanhyalal Patil alleging that they had

 given amount of Rs.5,25,000/- to him by way of loan and at that

 time eight blank cheques were taken as a security for the loan.

 As Sharad Goykar could not return the amount, Advocate

 Sumeet Patil had threatened him that he would lodge the FIR

 and then it is stated that he has managed the petitioner to lodge

 such FIR against the father of Sharad Goykar. It was also

 revealed in the investigation that accused Ankush Jamdar, at the

 relevant time, was attending a wedding function at a different

 place and statements of witnesses to that effect as well as

 photographs from the wedding have been collected. As thorough

 investigation has taken place and there was no evidence against

 the accused, therefore, report under Section 169 of the Code of

 Criminal Procedure was filed before the Special Court. The said

 report has been scrutinized by the District Central Scrutiny

 Committee constituting District Government Pleader, Additional

 Superintendent of Police and the Police Inspector of Protection of

 Civil Rights. The learned APP submitted that under such



::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022             ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                                     crwp1177.22
                                            7


 circumstances there is no necessity to handover the investigation

 to any other agency. It was also stated that when "B" Summary

 Report has been filed, the Special Court would definitely issue

 notice to the present petitioner and the petitioner will have the

 option of filing protest petition. Therefore, when there is

 alternate remedy available to the petitioner, there is no question

 of invoking the constitutional powers of this Court.



 5.       At the outset, it will have to be observed firstly that each

 case will have to be investigated by the investigating officer with

 utmost sensitivity. When it is a case of heinous crime like rape

 then the law as well as the Courts expect utmost sensitivity from

 the police officers. No doubt the investigating officer has to carry

 out the investigation in impartial manner and he is not supposed

 to take side either of the petitioner or the accused but suffice it

 to say that he should not succumb to any kind of pressure i.e.

 political      or    even     financial.   As   regards     invoking       of     the

 constitutional powers of this Court are concerned, definitely if

 this Court comes to conclusion that the investigation that has

 been done or is tried to be done in a particular way only and

 there is element of political or financial power, then definitely the




::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022                       ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                               crwp1177.22
                                    8


 situation demands, to protect the personal and fundamental

 rights of the victim, that this Court should interfere.



 6.       It appears that the struggle of the petitioner and the victim

 started much prior to this Petition, rather it was immediately

 after the alleged incident. The date of incident is 28 th May 2022

 and when no FIR was registered though complained of and even

 the Superintendent of Police appears to have not responded, the

 petitioner was required to approach this Court. After the notice

 was issued in respect of the said Petition, it appears that the FIR

 was got registered and ultimately when FIR was registered, that

 Petition appears to have been withdrawn. At that point of time

 the petitioner might not be expecting that the investigation will

 not be done in proper way by the investigating officer. But

 unfortunately, he is required to come to this Court once again by

 way of this Writ Petition. The FIR was lodged on 20 th June 2022

 and thereafter, it appears that on 24 th August 2022 the petitioner

 had also given complaint application to various authorities

 including the Superintendent of Police, informing as to what kind

 of harassment and pressure has been put on him by the

 investigating officer.




::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022                 ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                                           crwp1177.22
                                             9


 7.       Entire investigation papers have been produced on record.

 The affidavit-in-reply filed by respondent No.3 can be termed as

 defensive affidavit and he wants to show as to how he was right

 in    approaching             /   investigating   the    said     matter.       He     has

 conveniently not referred to the statement of the girl under

 Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the

 evidentiary value that could be attached to that statement. If we

 consider the investigation papers, it can be seen that the FIR is

 supported by the statement of the victim under Section 161 of

 the Code of Criminal Procedure, her statement under Section

 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as her medical

 certificate. The medical certificate though states that no injuries

 were found on her private part, yet possibility of sexual

 intercourse could not be ruled out. The investigating officers

 appear to have forgotten the fact that the incident had taken

 place on 28th May 2022 and her examination was done at about

 12.20 a.m. on 21st June 2022. There appears to be no

 investigation as to where exactly the girl was taken and whether

 any other person has seen the girl being taken by the accused.

 The mother of the girl is also supporting the statement. Now the

 story that has been developed and tried to be investigated in a

 way that since February 2022 the father of the victim was not



::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022                             ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                            crwp1177.22
                                 10


 working with accused Ankush Jamdar. However, it is to be noted

 that in the FIR as well as in the statement of other witnesses it

 has come that the petitioner is residing along with his family

 members in the field of accused Ankush Jamdar. Whether the

 petitioner was introduced by accused Kundlik Goykar to accused

 Ankush Jamdar or through anybody else, could not have been

 part of investigation at this stage, but unnecessary details

 appear to have been tried to be extracted by respondent No.3.

 Further major part of the investigation appears to be consumed

 showing that accused Ankush Jamdar was at a different place on

 the alleged date. Statements of certain witnesses have been

 recorded in that respect. No doubt when we have already stated

 that the investigation should be impartial then the investigating

 officer should also make an endeavour to see whether the

 accused was present at a particular place or not, but at the same

 time while brushing aside the entire theory of the petitioner, the

 time, distance etc. should also be taken into consideration.



 8.       Now the investigating officer says that the FIR is the

 outcome of instigation by an Advocate. Important point to be

 noted is that the Advocate appears to have come in picture after

 registration of the offence and not prior to that and therefore,



::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022              ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                                             crwp1177.22
                                                11


 the question of allegedly handing over the cheque signed by the

 son of accused Kundlik Goykar ought to have been considered

 from different angles. We have our own limitations to consider

 the evidence collected and to make any kind of comment but all

 these      observations            are    to   consider      as     to    whether         the

 investigation that has been done up till now was proper or not

 and whether there is necessity to hand it over to some other

 agency. Taking into consideration the entire documents as well

 as the investigation done up till now, definitely the case is made

 out to hand over the investigation to another officer, as there

 appears to be some political pressure on the investigating officer.



 9.       It appears that during the pendency of this                              Petition,

 accused No.1 Kundlik Goykar has been released under Section

 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 22 nd September

 2022       by    the     learned         Special    Judge,     Shrigonda,          District-

 Ahmednagar. Interesting point to be noted is that "B" Summary

 Report was filed by respondent No.3 with the Special Court on

 29th August 2022 and on the same day order has been passed by

 the learned Special Judge to issue notice to the informant and

 victim. Under such circumstance, whether application under

 Section       167(2)          of   the    Code      of   Criminal      Procedure         was



::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022                               ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::
                                                                    crwp1177.22
                                         12


 maintainable and that too for which accused could have been

 kept in custody till 22 nd September 2022, is also a question.

 However, we need not go into those aspects. Suffice it to say

 that when this Court is of the opinion that proper investigation

 appears to have not been made, then the said grievances will

 have to be redressed. At the cost of repetition, it can be said

 that it would be a fundamental right of a citizen to have fair and

 impartial investigation in respect of his grievances by an

 investigating agency, then definitely this is a case where the

 constitutional powers of this Court deserve to be exercised.

 Hence the following order:-



                                 ORDER

(I) The Writ Petition stands allowed.

(II) The investigation of Crime No.434 of 2022 registered with Karjat Police Station, Karjat, District- Ahmednagar is handed over to Mr. Ajit Bhagwat Patil, Sub Divisional Police Officer, Nagar Rural Division, Nagar, District-Ahmednagar and it would be under the direct supervision of District Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar.

(III) Till the investigation is over by the investigating officer to whom now the investigation is handed over, ::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 ::: crwp1177.22 13 learned Special Court, Shrigonda shall not proceed with further steps on the "B" Summary Report that has been produced before him.

(IV) Upon the investigation, the report be submitted by the investigating officer, to whom now the investigation is handed over, directly to the Special Court, and thereafter the Special Court to take further steps as provided under law.





 [RAJESH S. PATIL]                        [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI]
      JUDGE                                         JUDGE


 asb/OCT22




::: Uploaded on - 15/10/2022                       ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 19:36:37 :::