Girdhari Ramchandra Bhagwani v. State of Maharashtra
2013-02-15
A.B.CHAUDHARI, A.P.LAVANDE
body2013
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT A.P. Lavande, J.: 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:- "1) Direct handing over of investigation of Crime No. 385/2012 registered by Sitabuldi Police Station on 13/10/2012 for the offences punishable under section 448, 452 and 34 of Indian Penal Code to Crime Branch Nagpur or Crime Investigation Department, or any other independent unbiased authority, in the interest of justice. 2) Direct respondent no.2, Commissioner of Police to initiate departmental enquiry against the respondent no.4 so also other Police Officers who delayed with enquiry/investigation of complaint given by the petitioner, for dereliction of duty, in the interest of justice. 3. In so far as Prayer 1. is concerned, learned Adv. Mr. Vyas for the petitioner submits that he is not pressing the said relief, inasmuch as reply filed on behalf of respondents discloses that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter. However, Mr. Vyas submits that Prayer 2. be granted to the petitioner considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Main grievance made by the petitioner in this petition is that he has been illegally dispossessed from the premises held by him on lease from 1985 with one Mr. Bhaskar Marotrao Deogade, who expired in 2011. According to the petitioner, he was illegally dispossessed in the intervening night between 5th and 6th October, 2012, and although he approached the respondent no.4 on 6th itself, the respondent no.4 refused to register First Information Report. As such on 8th October, 2012, the petitioner lodged a report in writing against five accused, alleging dispossession by the legal representatives of original landlord and sought registration of First Information Report. 5. However, First Information Report was not registered till 13th October, 2012 as disclosed in the affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.3. Placing reliance upon the reported Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Sandeep Rammilan Shukla & others Vs. State of Mah. & others 2008 ALL MR (Cri) 3486., Mr.
5. However, First Information Report was not registered till 13th October, 2012 as disclosed in the affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.3. Placing reliance upon the reported Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Sandeep Rammilan Shukla & others Vs. State of Mah. & others 2008 ALL MR (Cri) 3486., Mr. Vyas submits that a case of commission of cognizable offences having been made out, it was obligatory for the Officer-in-Charge of Sitabuldi Police Station to register First Information Report against accused under appropriate Sections, and at the most, a preliminary enquiry ought to have been held within forty-eight hours. However, in total noncompliance of the said Judgment, the First Information Report came to be registered on 13th October, 2012, and as such respondent no.2 be directed to hold an enquiry against the erring Police Officers of Sitabuldi Police Station for dereliction of duties. 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Pathan for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 submitted that the preliminary enquiry could not be completed within forty-eight hours and as such First Information Report came to be registered only on 13th October, 2012. 7. Since, prima facie, non-registration of First Information Report is in contravention of the Judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Sandeep Rammilan Shukla & others cited supra., we deem it appropriate to direct the respondent no.2 to enquire into the allegations made by the petitioner, and take appropriate action in the matter for non-registration of First Information Report within a period of forty-eight hours in terms of the above referred Full Bench Judgment. The respondent no.2 is at liberty to conduct an enquiry either himself, or through any subordinate officer as he may deem fit and proper. 8. With these directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.