Mumbai: The Bombay high court last week severely criticised the Chembur police for “deliberately” not investigating a cheating case for over 21 months and not filing chargesheet in the case.
The order was passed by a bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Rajesh Patil after the public prosecutor Prajakta Shinde and the police inspector Rajesh Pukale failed to inform the court that the high court itself had, on August 2, 2024, restrained the police from filing the chargesheet in the case.
Court Labels Delay 'Unconscionable', Demands Top Officer’s Affidavit
In a detailed order passed on July 23, the high court came down heavily on the police for not investigating a criminal case and called the delay “unconscionable” and a violation of basic criminal jurisprudence.
The court took strong exception to the police inaction and directed the Joint Commissioner of Police (Law and Order), Mumbai, to file a detailed affidavit on the lapses.
Court Refuses Relief Despite Complainant’s Consent To Quashing FIR
The court was hearing a petition filed by Milind Ruparel and three others seeking quashing of an FIR registered against them on September 11, 2023, under sections 420 (cheating) read with 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.
The complainant had consented to the quashing, and the parties had executed consent terms as part of a settlement in related anticipatory bail proceedings. Despite this, the court refused to grant relief due to glaring lapses in the investigation.
No Witness Statements Recorded; Probe Aimed To Benefit Accused
However, when the court learnt that the probe had come to a standstill and chargesheet had not been filed, the court remarked: “It is an admitted fact that the investigation is incomplete and a chargesheet has not been filed for reasons best known to the investigating officers.”
it added: “This shocks the conscience of this court. Not a single witness statement has been recorded. The investigation has been kept pending only to benefit the accused persons. This is the only inference that can be drawn.”
It further observed that one of the petitioners, Sumeet Sadawarti, was arrested and spent six days in custody despite no substantial investigation being carried out.
Arrest Without Proper Investigation Violates Citizen’s Rights: HC
“It is thus apparent that a citizen has to face arrest without proper and thorough investigation. This clearly violates the fundamental rights of a citizen, though an accused,” the bench remarked.
The judges noted that the investigation had been carried out in a “lackadaisical manner” for nearly two years. “... investigation of the present crime is been deliberately conducted for last about 2 years in lackadaisical manner, for the benefit of other accused persons,” the court said.
Judges Direct Joint CP To Personally Examine Entire Case File
The judges even went to the extent of directing the joint commissioner of police to personally examine the entire investigation record and take necessary action against errant officers, if necessary. Also, the JtCP has been asked not to delegate his powers to any sub-ordinate Officer.
Prosecutor Failed To Inform Court About Prior Stay On Chargesheet
Interestingly, the prosecutor failed to bring earlier orders to the notice of the court by which it had not only stayed the probe in case, but also restrained the police from filing the chargesheet.
On June 10, 2024, the HC had said: “Till the returnable date, learned Judge of the trial Court is requested not to proceed with miscellaneous application No. 144 of 2024 filed in anticipatory bail application No. 2012 of 2023.”
On August 2, 2024, while extending the stay on the probe, it granted relief to the petitioner as per prayer (d) of its petition. The prayer read: “That pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Writ Petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct Respondent No. I not to file the Charge-Sheet before the concerned Trial Court in connection with FIR No.543 of 2023 dated 11th September, 2023 filed by Mr. Aniket Satish Deshpande Respondent No 2, registered by Chembur Police Station Respondent No.1 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 471.120 (B), r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the Petitioners.”
.jpg)