Non-Application Of Mind By IO, Copied FIR From Complaint: Bombay HC Pulls Up Cop For Wrongly Booking Parties In Forgery Case
Taking strong objection to a "copied" First Information Report (FIR) filed by the Pune Police, the Bombay High Court recently said that dragging people into criminal cases unnecessarily causes immense mental agony and trauma. A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Dr Neela Gokhale noted the "unfathomable harassment" caused to a few residents of Pune's Talegaon area, who were booked in...
Taking strong objection to a "copied" First Information Report (FIR) filed by the Pune Police, the Bombay High Court recently said that dragging people into criminal cases unnecessarily causes immense mental agony and trauma.
A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Dr Neela Gokhale noted the "unfathomable harassment" caused to a few residents of Pune's Talegaon area, who were booked in a FIR, which was pursuant to the orders of a Magistrate on a private complaint. The judges noted that the FIR was nothing but a "copy-paste" of the private complaint filed by the complainant before the Magistrate.
"The present case exhibits total non-application of mind by the Investigating Officer, resulting in innumerable and unfathomable harassment to the Petitioners, citizens of India," the judges said in the order passed on August 5.
The bench further noted that in the FIR the Investigating Officer (IO) has invoked section 467 (forging a document) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) despite there being no allegation against the petitioners that they forged any document.
"According to us, dragging persons in criminal cases implicating them in the offences which are clearly not made out, causes immense mental agony and harassment to the person accused of such an offence and also violates his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India," the judges said. The judges opined that this harassment was because of the IO's sheer obliviousness and non-application of mind.
"Section 467 of IPC is the only section applied herein which is punishable with life imprisonment and therefore it changes the total complexion and/or gamut of the allegation against the Petitioners," the judges noted. In this view of the matter, the judges deemed it appropriate to bring the said fact to the notice of the Joint Commissioner of Police (Law and Order), Pimpri-Chinchwad Police. It therefore directed the Joint Commissioner to file its reply to the present Petition and explain the issues noted by the bench in the matter.
"We direct the Joint Commissioner of Police (Law and Order) not to delegate his powers to any subordinate Officer/Officers for filing the reply," the bench made it clear.
The bench, therefore, ordered to list the matter again on September 9.
Appearance:
Advocates Sadashiv Deshmukh, Rakesh Sharad Patil, VVTapkir and VD Tapkir appeared for the Petitioners.
Assistant Public Prosecutor Ashish I Satpute represented the State.
Advocate Vishal Laxman Kolekar appeared for the Complainant.
Case Title: Ankush Dattu Dhore vs State of Maharashtra (CrWP/1487/2020)