Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt Meera Niwariya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 November, 2019
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
WP 21929 of 2019 (Habeas Corpus)
Smt. Meera Niowariya Vs. State of MP and Others
Gwalior, Dated 29/11/2019
Shri Deepak Sharma with Shri Sunil Kumar Gupta, Counsel for
the petitioner.
Shri Alok Sharma, Government Advocate for the respondents
No. 1 to 4/ State.
In compliance of the order dated 06/11/2019, the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior has submitted its status report. It is mentioned that a preliminary enquiry was done by the City Superintendent, Gwalior and by its preliminary enquiry report dated 21/11/2019, the following conclusions have been drawn by the Enquiry Officer:-
% % tkWap fu"d"kZ % % ^^ esjs }kjk fd;s x;s lEiw.kZ izkFkfed tkap esa fy;s x;s lkf{k;ksa ds dFku ,oa le{k esa izLrqr fd;s x;s nLrkosth lk{;ksa ds v/;;u ls ;g ik;k x;k fd fnukad 12&13-09-19 dh njE;kuh jkr dks"fo"k;kafdr ;kfpdk MCY;w-ih-dz- 21929@19 dh xqe'kqnk nh{kk us rRdkyhu Fkkuk izHkkjh Jh vfuy flag HknkSfj;k ds le{k iwNrkN ds nkSjku rRle; Fkkus ij ekStwn ;ksxs'k ujofj;k ij cykRdkj dk vkjksi yxk;k FkkA ,d laK;s xaHkhj vijk/k dh lwpuk feyus ds ckotwn rRdkyhu Fkkuk izHkkjh Jh vfuy flag HknkSfj;k us mDr ekSf[kd fjiksVZ dks xaHkhjrk ls ugha ysrs gq;s ml ij dksbZ dk;Zokgh ugh dh] tks fd n.M izfdz;k lafgrk dh /kkjk 154 dk mYya?ku gSA vr% eSa] uxj iqfyl v/kh{kd Xokfy;j] bl fu"d"kZ ij igqpa k gwW fd rRdkyhu Fkkuk izHkkjh Jh vfuy flag HknkSfj;k dk mDr d`R;
Fkkuk izHkkjh ds :i esa muds inh; drZO;ksa ds mYya?ku ,oa drZO; ds izfr ?kksj ykijokgh rFkk mnklhurk dk ifjpk;d gSA^^ 2 Accordingly, the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior by order dated 24/11/2019 has suspended Anil Singh Bhadoriya, the then SHO, Police Station Hazira, District Gwalior. It is also mentioned that a SIT has been constituted to search out the missing corpus who is minor, aged 16 years.
Considered the status report filed by the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior.
The Enquiry Officer in its enquiry report has held that on 18/09/2019 the notice was sent to Anil Singh Bhadoriya, Town Inspector, however, he was not available in the house and his relatives refused to accept the notice. Again on 19/09/2019, a notice was sent to the House of Anil Singh Bhadoriya, Town Inspector, but again he was not found in the house and his elder brother refused to accept the notice and accordingly, the notice was affixed on his house. The observations made in this regard in the preliminary enquiry report are as under:-
^^ fujh{kd vfuy flag HknkSfj;k ds dk;kZy; esa mifLFkr u gksus ,oa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; [k.MihB Xokfy;j }kjk vknsf'kr tkap esa gks jgs foyac dks ns[krs gq;s n.M izfdz;k lafgrk dh /kkjk 64&65 ds vUrxZr * fnukad 18-09-19 dks Fkkuk Xokfy;j ds vkj{kd leKku 'kkD; dks dEiw fLFkr muds fdjk;s ds fuokl ij uksfVl rkehy djkus gsrq Hkstk x;kA mDr fuokl ij fujh{kd vfuy flag HknkSfj;k vuqifLFkr feys ,oa muds ifjtuksa us uksfVl ysus ls bUdkj dj fn;kA bl laca/k esa vkj{kd ds dFku ,oa mldk jokuxh rFkk okilh lkUgs dh izekf.kr izfr layXu gSA * blds mijkar fnukad 19-09-19 dks iqu% Fkkuk Xokfy;j ds vkj{kd lanhi tkV dks fujh{kd vfuy flag 3 HknkSfj;k ds mDr fuokl ij uksfVl rkehy djkus gsrq Hkstk x;kA mDr fuokl ij fujh{kd vfuy flag HknkSfj;k vuqifLFkr feys ,oa ?kj ij mifLFkr muds cM+s HkkbZ us uksfVl ysus ls bUdkj dj fn;kA rc vkj{kd ds }kjk /kkjk 65 tkQkS- ds rgr uksfVl dh ,d izfr mDr fuokl LFkku ij pLik dh xbZ vkSj mldh ,d QksVks vkj{kd }kjk vius eksckby ls yh xbZA bl laca/k esa vkj{kd ds dFku] eksckby ls yh xbZ QksVks dh izekf.kr fizUV&vkmV ,oa vkj{kd dk jokuxh rFkk okilh lkUgs dh izekf.kr izfr layXu gSA^^ and accordingly, it has been found that although Yogesh Narwariya as well as the missing corpus were recovered by the police station Hazira, District Gwalior and the then SHO, Anil Singh Bhadoriya, Town Inspector had enquired from the missing corpus who had levelled the allegation of rape against Yogesh Narwariya, who too was present in the Court, but Anil Singh Bhadoriya, Town Inspector did not took cognizance of the allegations made by missing corpus and did not take any action under Section 154 of CrPC and accordingly, it has been found that Anil Singh Bhadoriya, Town Inspector is guilty of gross negligence. Accordingly, the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior by order dated 24/11/2019 has placed Anil Singh Bhadoriya, Town Inspector under suspension. However, the entire status report is silent with regard to the fact as to why no FIR has been lodged against Anil Singh Bhadoriya for not recording of FIR for offence under Section 376 of IPC.
Section 154 of CrPC reads as under:-
''154.Information in cognizable cases. (1) Every 4 information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read Over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf.
[Provided that if the information is given by the woman against whom and offence under section 326A, section 326B, section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB, section 376E, or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) is alleged to have been committed or attempted, then such information shall be recorded, by a woman police officer or any woman officer:
Provided further that.-
(a) in the event that the person against whom an offence under section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB, section 376E, or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) is alleged to have been committed or attempted, is temporarily or permanently mentally or physically disabled, then such information shall be recorded by a police officer, at the residence of the person seeking to report such offence or at a convenient place of such person's choice, in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator, as the case may be;
(b) the recording of such information shall be videographed;
(c) the police officer shall get the statement of the person recorded by a Judicial Magistrate under clause (a) of sub-section(5A) of section 164 as soon as possible.
(2) A copy of the information as recorded under sub-
section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of cost, to the informant.
5
Any person aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a police station to record the information referred to in subsection (1) may send the substance of such information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him, in the manner provided by this Code, and such officer shall have all the powers of an officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence.'' Sections 166, 166-A, 167 of IPC read as under:-
''166. Public servant disobeying law, with intent to cause injury to any person.--Whoever, being a public servant, knowingly disobeys any direction of the law as to the way in which he is to conduct himself as such public servant, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will, by such disobedience, cause injury to any person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.'' ''166A. Public servant disobeying direction under law.- Whoever, being a public servant--
(a) knowingly disobeys any direction of the law which prohibits him from requiring the attendance at any place of any person for the purpose of investigation into an offence or any other matter, or
(b) knowingly disobeys, to the prejudice of any person, any other direction of the law regulating the manner in which he shall conduct such investigation, or
(c) fails to record any information given to him under sub-section (1) of section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), in relation to cognizable offence punishable under section 326A, section 326B, section 354, section 354B, section 370, section 370A, section 376, section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB, section 376E or Section 509, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may 6 extend to two years, and shall also be liable to fine.
''167. Public servant framing an incorrect document with intent to cause injury.--Whoever, being a public servant, and being, as [such public servant, charged with the preparation or translation of any document or electronic record, frames, prepares or translates that document or electronic record] in a manner which he knows or believes to be incorrect, intending thereby to cause or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause injury to any person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.'' In the present case, the findings of the enquiry report are that even the person against whom the allegation of rape was made, was also present before Anil Singh Bhadoriya, Town Inspector, but since no FIR was lodged and there is nothing on record to show that Yogesh Narwariya against whom the allegation of rape was made, was arrested, this Court is of also prima facie view that the then Anil Singh Bhadoriya had allowed Yogesh Narwariya to go Scot-free. Even according to the statement of Harendra Singh which was filed along with the status report on earlier occasion, it is clear that Yogesh Narwariya was also allowed to go. Thus, prima facie, Anil Singh Bhadoriya, Town Inspector had screened the offender.
Under these circumstances, as the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior has not taken any action in accordance with law, therefore, the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior is directed to immediately lodge a FIR against Anil Singh Bhadoriya for offence under Sections 166, 7 166A, 167 and 201 of IPC.
The Government Advocate is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior for necessary compliance.
List this case on 2nd December, 2019 for compliance as well as for filing of the status report pointing out the steps taken by the SIT as well as for production of missing corpus.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge MKB Digitally signed by MAHENDRA KUMAR BARIK Date: 2019.11.30 14:13:23 +05'30'