Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramlakhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 December, 2016
1
MCRC.1473/2016
08/12/2016
Shri Arun Pateria, counsel for the applicant.
Shr Girdhari Singh Chauhan, Public Prosecutor
for the respondents/State with Shri Sanjay Singh,
T.I., Police Station - Biloua, District - Gwalior.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that a Crime No.03/2015 was registered by Police Station Dehat, Dabra under Sections 302,307,147,148 and 149 of IPC. In the said case, one Nawal Kishore was also made an accused.
It is mentioned in the present petition, which is supported by an affidavit of Ramlakhan that he has been informed by Police Personals posted in Police Station - Dehat, Dabra that Nawal Kishore who is an accused in Crime No.03/15 is a relative of respondent no.3. On the verbal instructions of the respondent no.3, the persons who were arrayed as accused in Crime No.03/2015 were not arrested. Still, the charge-sheet has not been filed in the said case. Subsequently, one Surendra and Raju @ Rajendra who were also arrayed as accused in Crime No.03/2015, assaulted Harkand, uncle of the applicant and Kamlesh. A FIR was lodged. Crime No.186/2015 has been registered by Police Station Biloua, District Gwalior for offence under Section 307/34 of IPC against Surendra Singh, Raju and one more unknown person. The copy of the said FIR is filed as Annexure P/3.
The allegation made by the applicant in the 2 MCRC.1473/2016 present petition is that under the influence of the respondents no.1 to 3, the police is not taking any action against the accused persons. It is also specifically mentioned in ground no.3 that the respondent no.3 has been made a party to this petition so that this fact can be verified that at the instance of the respondent no.3, no action is being taken against the accused persons.
As it is evident from the previous order-sheets that on several occasions, opportunities were given to the State counsel to submit the status of the investigation. By order dated 24/10/2016, it is clear that a statement was made by the State counsel that the Police Case Diary of Crime No.186/2015 is not traceable and the Carbon Case Diary is being prepared. On 09/11/2016, a compliance report was filed in which it was mentioned that except X-ray Report, all other relevant documents have been reconstructed. The X-ray Report is yet to be obtained from the J.A.Hospital, Gwalior and further time was sought to produce the complete case diary. On 25/11/2016, again a statement was made that the X-ray Report is still awaited from the J.A.Hospital, Gwalior.
Considering the conduct of the police authorities, this Court passed the following order on 25/11/2016:-
"This progress report reflects the casual approach of the SHO, Police Station - Biloua, District - Gwalior, 3 MCRC.1473/2016 therefore, it will be appropriate that SHO, Biloua be directed to remain present before this Court to explain as to why the documents could not be obtained from J.A.Hospital, Gwalior and why the case diary has not been produced and why the compliance of the order of the this Court has not been made."
Today the SHO, Police Station - Biloua, District
- Gwalior has appeared in person. Once again a casual compliance report has been filed. It is mentioned that on 29/11/2016, a request was made to J.A.Hospital on Phone to supply the copy of X- ray Report. It was replied by the concerned doctor that the same shall be made available after the receipt of the concerning documents and this conversation is alleged to have been recorded in Rojnamcha Sana which has been filed as Annexure A/1. From the Rojnamcha Sana annexed as Annexure A/1, it appears that in fact no effort has been made and merely a paper work is being done. If any police officer had gone to the J.A.Hospital, Gwalior to collect the X-ray Report, then an entry with regard to his leaving for the hospital and coming back from the hospital was required to be made in the Rojnamcha Sana. In order to overcome that lapse, it has been mentioned that merely on phone, a request was made.
It is further mentioned that a letter dated 03/12/2016 was sent to Incharge, Cyber Cell, District - Gwalior to supply the copy of the call 4 MCRC.1473/2016 details of the complainant which were taken out on earlier occasion. A copy of that letter dated 03/12/2016 is annexed with the compliance report.
So far as the contention of the SHO that Polygraph Test was got conducted in Crime No.22/15 and the report of the Polygraph Test is concerned, it is suffice to say that the present petition is in relation to Crime No.186/2015 registered by Police Station - Biloua, District - Gwalior. What is the relevancy of the Polygraph Test got conducted in Crime No.22/2015 by Police Station - Dehat, Dabra, is not known. Even the SHO who is present in the Court fairly admitted that the Polygraph Test conducted in another case can not be read while investigating the matter in Crime No.186/2015.
It is also mentioned in the compliance report that a letter has been addressed to the Superintendent of Police, Cyber Cell, Gwalior to obtain the call details of Mobile Nos. 9826224509 and 9009951134. A copy of the said letter is annexed as Annexure A/5. From the perusal of this letter, it is clear that the SHO, Police Station - Biloua, District - Gwalior had sought the call details of the applicant/complainant and the witnesses. On query by the Court that why the call details of the applicant/complainant and the witnesses are being sought, the SHO immediately replied "vfHk;qDr ds " and then he immediately stopped. Thus it can be easily 5 MCRC.1473/2016 understood from the reaction of the SHO that on the instructions of the accused persons, the investigation is being done. Again, it is mentioned in the compliance report that again a request on Phone was made to the J.A.Hospital, Gwalior to make the X-ray Report available, however, it has been replied by the concerned person from J.A.Hospital that the second copy of the report is still not traceable.
From the different compliance reports filed by the police authorities, this Court had already observed by order dated 25/11/2016 that the conduct of the police authorities shows their casual approach towards the investigation. The compliance report, which has been filed today, further confirms the attitude of the police authorities in the matter. The short reply given by the SHO " vfHk;qDr ds ", further clarifies that infact the investigating officer is acting under the directions of the accused persons.
Under these circumstances, this Court is left with no other option but to issue notices to the respondent no.2, Superintendent of Police, District - Gwalior and respondent no.3 Shri Yogeshwar Sharma, Additional Superintendent of Police, District
- Gwalior. The respondents no.2 and 3 are directed to give specific reply to the allegation made by the petitioner in this petition to the effect that since one of the accused in Crime No.3/2015 is a relative of the respondent no.3, therefore, the entire 6 MCRC.1473/2016 investigation is being manipulated at the instance of the respondent no.3.
Process Fee be paid by registered mode by tomorrow. The notices be made returnable within a week.
Apart from the issuance of notice, the counsel for the State is also directed to inform the respondents no.2 and 3 by telephonic communication.
List this case on 20/12/2016. On the said date, the SHO shall remain present alongwith the further progress report which he would do in the investigation.
A typed copy of this order be supplied to the counsel for the State for necessary information and compliance.
(G.S.Ahluwalia)
AKS Judge