Asking Accused To Mark Attendance At Police Station Not Mere Formality, It Is An Opportunity For IO To Investigate: Bombay High Court

Justice S. G. Mehare observed thus while allowing the anticipatory bail application in a case of criminal intimidation and hurt by dangerous weapons.

The judge held that the prosecution failed to explain why the police hadn't recovered the weapon when the accused was attending the police station pursuant to the court's interim protection.

"Granting the attendance is not for the purpose of mere attendance. It is an opportunity to the Investigation Officer to make investigation in pursuance of the allegations made against the accused," the court held.

The complainant has alleged that the accused entered his shop forcibly and assaulted him and other persons with a stick. A case under sections 323, 324, 294, 452, 143, 147, 148, 149, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code was registered.

The applicant Sayed Ali sought anticipatory bail in a plea filed through advocate Wajeed Shaikh. In April 2022, the court granted interim relief to the applicants and directed that they remain present before the Investigating Officer on every Monday, Wednesday and Friday between 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon till further orders and co-operate with the investigation. The first informant and accused have also been fighting in Civil Court for inam land.

The applicants submitted that they have strictly adhered to the condition imposed by the court for interim relief and have been present before the police station on the designated days and time. However, the police never asked for the weapon of assault and was satisfied with the investigation. In fact, the other co-accused have been arrested and the sticks used in the crime have been recovered from them. Hence, custodial interrogation is unnecessary.

The assistant public prosecutor argued that the applicants committed a serious offence and custodial interrogation is required to recover the sticks used in the attack.

The court noted that there is no reason why the recovery of weapon was not done when the applicants attended the police station. Thus, it held that the prosecution has lost the opportunity to conduct a proper investigation. Further, record reveals that the weapon has already been recovered. Hence, recovery of weapon is not required. The court also referred to the history of civil litigation between the accused and the complainant and stated that the possibility of a false allegation cannot be ruled out. In light of this the court allowed the application and confirmed the interim relief. The condition for bail was modified and the applicants were directed to attend the police station as and when called by the investigation officer with written notice.

Case Title: Syed Athar Ali and Another v. The State of Maharashtra

Case no: ABA/509/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 248

Coram: Justice S. G. Mehare

Headnotes (Indian Penal Code) –

Section 143 – A member of an unlawful assembly can be punished with imprisonment up to six months, or fine, or both.

Section 147 – Rioting shall be punished with imprisonment up to two years, or fine, or both.

Section 148 – A person guilty of rioting, being armed with deadly weapon, shall be punished with imprisonment up to three years, or fine, or both.

Section 149 – If a member of an unlawful assembly commits an offence to achieve a common goal, every member of the unlawful assembly guilty shall be guilty of the offence.

Section 294 – A person who does any obscene act or sing any obscene song in or near a public place, to the annoyance of others, shall be punished with up to three months imprisonments, or fine, or both.

Section 323 – A person who voluntarily causes hurt shall be punished with up to one year imprisonment, or fine up to one thousand rupees, or both.

Section 324 – A person who voluntarily causes hurt by dangerous weapons or means shall be punished with imprisonment up to three years, or fine, or both.

Section 452 – A person who commits house trespass after preparation of causing hurt to someone, or assaulting someone, or wrongfully restraining someone or puts someone in fear of these shall be punished with imprisonment up to seven years and fine.

Section 506 – A person who commits the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment up to two years, or fine, or both.