The Bombay High Court has ordered the Maharashtra government to pay Rs 5 lakh compensation to a man, holding that he had been illegally arrested by the Mumbai Police and kept in detention for 24 days.
The bench, in the judgement passed on October 22, also ordered strict action, including immediate suspension, against the police sub-inspector who took action against the man, as well as against other officials concerned.
The case
The man, a businessman named Bipin Satish Chandra Agrwal, was arrested on August 4, 2017 and got bail on August 28 that year.
Earlier, he had acted as constituted attorney for his mother-in-law in connection with a flat of hers in Andheri. He had negotiated the sale of the flat for about Rs 1.64 crore. Subsequently, the real estate firm, Seth and Sonal Developers, had given him an advance of Rs 2 lakh.
However, Agrwal said that as soon as he received the cash, the police arrived at the spot and took him to the Azad Maidan Police station. The police had filed a first information report against him on extortion charges based on a complaint by the developer, according to the petition.
A sessions court granted him bail on August 28, after which he was released on a bond of Rs 25,000.
Court Observations
A bench of Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Kamal R Khata observed that there was nothing on record to show that Agrwal was unknown to the developer, and that a preliminary inquiry would have uncovered the facts of the matter. “The Police deliberately did not take any pains to find out why was the cash given,” the judges observed.
The court said that the police attempted to characterise Agrwal as a gangster, history-sheeter or extortionist without any evidence to show for it. It went on to describe his arrest as high-handed and arbitrary.
The judges said that after hearing Agrwal, who appeared in person, in detail, they “felt a sense of deep anguish imagining what he went through”.
'Police Machinery Weaponised'
“Clearly this is a case of sheer abuse of process by the Developer in collusion with the Police,” the court said. “It is a classic case where a Police Sub Inspector has exploited his official position and weaponised police machinery at his command, to advance the developer’s interest against the petitioner, to wreak havoc in the petitioner’s life apparently because he did not succumb to their pressure to accept the deal offered and threatened them to expose their wrongdoings along with certain society members.”
The court also held the magistrate responsible for Agrwal’s detention, noting that “no reasons” were recorded to justify his continued custody. It directed the registry to place the judgement before the administrative committee of the High Court, so that appropriate action could be taken against the magistrate.
