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 1, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Vivekbhai Kanaiyalal Thakkar vs State Of Gujarat & 5 on 3 November, 2014

Author: J.B.Pardiwala

Bench: J.B.Pardiwala

          R/SCR.A/4366/2014                                    ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - TO LODGE
                       FIR/COMPLAINT) NO. 4366 of 2014

================================================================
              VIVEKBHAI KANAIYALAL THAKKAR....Applicant(s)
                               Versus
                 STATE OF GUJARAT & 5....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MS. KRUTI M SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HS SONI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

                                 Date : 03/11/2014


                                  ORAL ORDER

By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a resident of village Thara, Taluka Kankarej, District Banaskantha, complains of inaction on the part of the police authorities in not registering the First Information Report on the strength of the written complaint filed by the petitioner addressed to the Circle Police Inspector, Thara Police Station, Banaskantha, a copy of which has been forwarded to (i) Police Superintendent, Banaskantha; (ii) Home Minister, Gandhinagar; (iii) Chief Minister, Gujarat State; (iv) Gujarat High Court; (v) Human Rights Commission, Gandhinagar; and (vi) Anti Corruption Bureau, Gandhinagar (Annexure-B to this petition).

The petitioner has made the following averments in the Page 1 of 4 R/SCR.A/4366/2014 ORDER petition :

"The petitioner states that thereafter he was taken into the police car in one college compound near Police Station and he was abused and beaten in public by both these police personnel by stick and wooden log.
The petitioner states that the petitioner has constantly inquired that why he is beaten by police but he was not given any answer and he was continuously abused and beaten for 15 minutes and thereafter he was taken into the police car to Thara Police Station and without giving any complaint in writing against him, he was sent into the lock up of the said Police Station and after some time PSI Sisodiya has brought the petitioner out of the lock up and took him into his chamber and at that time Neelabhai had caught hold of both the hands of the petitioner and PSI Sisodiya has given 4 to 5 slaps and beaten him by wooden log on his back side.
The petitioner states that at that time the police has demanded Rs.2 lacs by stating that one application has come against the petitioner from one girl. The petitioner was threatened by police that if he would not give Rs.2 lacs then his family members would also be put into trouble, therefore the petitioner has telephoned his father and called him in the Police Station.
The petitioner states that his father has requested PSI to give him some time to arrange for money and requested to set the petitioner free but that time PSI Sisodiya has insisted that if the father of the petitioner and the petitioner gives in writing for admission of their guilt then only they would be set free or else the petitioner would be fit into false rape case and the police has taken the signatures on blank papers.
The petitioner states that thereafter the father of the petitioner was allowed to go to his shop for making arrangement for Rs.2 lacs and his father has given Rs.2 lacs to one person who was sent by PSI Sisodiya and that person has talked on mobile phone with Sisodiya upon receiving the said money and thereafter the petitioner was allowed to go from the Police Station by PSI Mr.Sisodiya.
Page 2 of 4
R/SCR.A/4366/2014 ORDER The petitioner states that on 23.09.14, the amount of Rs.4.30 lacs was withdrawn for hypothecation account from Pragati Coop. Bank Ltd. Thara and after depositing Rs.60,000/- on 23.09.14 and Rs.45,000/- on 24.09.14 from Rs.4.30 lacs, Rs.3,25,000/- was lying in the shop and out of the said amount Rs.2 lacs was given by the father of the petitioner to one unknown person sent by PSI Sisodiya.
The petitioner states that he was very much frightened and he has immediately come to Ahmedabad at his maternal uncle's house and he has taken the treatment in Sola Civil Hospital because of tremendous pain resulted out of severe beating by above mentioned three police personnel, on 26.09.14. Thereafter the said case was registered as Medico Legal Case at Ahmedabad Police Control Room through Sola Police Station.
The petitioner states that on 26.09.14 several e-mails were sent to SP, Home Minister, Chief Minister, Human Rights Commission, Anti Corruption Bureau etc. narrating the entire incident and police atrocity and custodial torture."

Ms.Shah, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that after the complaint in writing was handed over at the concerned police station, many further communications were sent by her client in that regard, but till this date they have gone unheeded. Ms.Shah submits that no action has been taken against the erring police officers.

Taking into consideration the nature of the allegations levelled in this petition and the fact that the petitioner had already filed a complaint in writing referred to above, the District Superintendent of Police, Banaskantha, is hereby directed to look into the same and, after a preliminary inquiry, shall order registration of the F.I.R. if the same discloses commission of a cognizable offence, within a period of fifteen Page 3 of 4 R/SCR.A/4366/2014 ORDER days from today. For any reason, if the District Superintendent of Police, Banaskantha, is of the view that there is no substance in the allegations levelled by the petitioner and the complaint fails to disclose commission of any cognizable offence, then in such circumstances, the petitioner be informed in writing about such decision.

With the above observations and directions, this application is disposed of. Direct service is permitted.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) MOIN Page 4 of 4