Advertisement

Mumbai

Updated on: Monday, July 26, 2021, 12:30 AM IST

Mumbai: Court rejects plea seeking FIR against previous judge

Advertisement

A special court designated under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act last Monday refused to entertain a plea of a man seeking a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to file an FIR against a predecessor of that court.

The applicant Anupam Padaya had prayed for such a direction under Sec 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code under which a magistrate can order a probe by a police officer of a cognizable offence. He sought a previous judge of the special court, AN Mare be booked for offences under IPC Sec 217 (public servant acting to save person from legal punishment), Sec 119 (public servant concealing design to commit offence), Sec 120B (criminal conspiracy) among others.

He also alleged that the judge violated two provisions of the SC/ST Act and gave a free hand to Vakola police to victimize him by registering a fake complaint against him. He also sought that FIR be registered against witnesses of the fake FIR and a DGP for not following the directions of apex court in a judgment and filing a false report, which the judge allegedly sidetracked to save them from punishment.

Additional Sessions Judge DP Shingade of the special SC/ST Act court said the court cannot entertain the plea without prior sanction of competent authority to prosecute the learned judicial officer AN Mare.

It said the allegations are in respect of offences alleged to have been committed in the discharge or purported discharge of official duty or judicial function by committing an act or omission while passing orders. In such case, the court said that the Bombay High Court has held in a 2014 judgment that no court in Maharashtra shall entertain any prosecution or any complaint under any provision of the CrPC including under Sec 156(3) of the CrPC against a judge of the HC or judicial officer in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed in discharge or purported discharge of judicial function by passing a judicial order or by committing any act or omission or by doing anything or speaking any words in the court precincts, without there being any prior sanction from a competent authority.

(To receive our E-paper on whatsapp daily, please click here. We permit sharing of the paper's PDF on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)

Advertisement
Published on: Monday, July 26, 2021, 12:30 AM IST
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement