Pune: In a strong indictment of alleged police overreach, the Additional Sessions Court in Pune has criticised the Samarth Police, calling their actions a “sheer abuse of the process of court,” while granting anticipatory bail to Aasma Naim Sayyed in a cheating case involving a financial dispute of ₹15 lakh.
The court, presided over by Judge S.S. Kanthale, observed serious inconsistencies in the conduct of the police. Notably, on March 27, 2026, Samarth Police had submitted a report before a lower court stating that the matter between the parties had been amicably settled and was civil in nature. However, within a week, on April 7, the same police station registered an FIR against the applicant without conducting a detailed inquiry.
During the hearing, Advocate Sameer Shaikh, appearing for the applicant, argued that the FIR was not a genuine criminal complaint but a retaliatory move. He pointed out that the applicant had earlier approached the JMFC court under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, alleging harassment by the complainant’s family.
The defence further submitted that the complainant’s husband is a retired Crime Branch officer and her son-in-law is currently serving in a police unit in Pune, raising concerns about possible influence on the investigation. The court took note of these submissions while assessing the sequence of events.
In its observations, the court remarked that the police should not have registered the FIR without a proper inquiry, especially when they had recently termed the dispute civil and reported a settlement. The judge also raised broader concerns about a suspicious modus operandi wherein funds are allegedly routed through relatives, questioning whether such amounts represent legitimate income or unaccounted money. The court indicated that only a proper inquiry by competent authorities could establish the truth.
Allowing the anticipatory bail application, the court emphasized that police machinery cannot be used as a tool for coercion or recovery of alleged dues. It noted that if any amount was genuinely owed, the appropriate legal remedy would be to initiate civil proceedings, which had not been pursued in this case.
The court’s sharp remarks have triggered discussion in legal and civic circles, particularly on the misuse of criminal law in civil disputes and the need for greater accountability in police procedures.
