Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 162 (RAJ)

Sanjeev Gupta v. State of Rajasthan

2015-01-19

ALOK SHARMA

body2015
Hon'ble SHARMA, J.—These two interconnected criminal misc. petitions pertain to two FIRs, one bearing FIR No.409/2013 dated 20.12.2013, registered at Police Station Moti Dungari, District Jaipur City (East) for alleged offences under Sections 283, 353, 504 IPC and the other, FIR No.99/2014 dated 15.03.2014, registered at Police Station Moti Dungari, District Jaipur City (East) for alleged offences under Sections 323, 341, 504 IPC both with different versions of an incident of 20.12.2013. While in Criminal Misc. Petition No.5021/2014, it has been prayed that FIR No.409/2013 dated 20.12.2013 be quashed as it is vitiated by malafides and an abuse of the criminal process, in Criminal Misc. Petition No.5022/2014 it has been prayed that investigation into FIR No.99/2014 dated 15.03.2014 be transferred to CID(CB) or in the alternate it be conducted by an police official in the IPS cadre. 2. The underlying facts relevant to both FIRs are that in the course of a drive for removal of encroachment on Jawaharlal Nehru Marg by the officers of Jaipur Municipal Corporation (hereinafter “JMC”) and officers of the Moti Dungari Police Station, hawkers encroaching the road in front of J.K. Lawn Hospital on seeing the team of the police and officials of JMC began dispersing & running helter-skelter. In FIR No.409/2013 it is alleged that the petitioner then arrived at the scene to obstruct removal of a hawker and sought to provoke the crowd which had gathered to prevent the Enforcement Team from discharging its official duties, used abusive language, obstructed traffic on the road by creating a commotion. It was alleged that the petitioner was at the forefront of the obstruction in the discharge of official duties and in these circumstances offences under Sections 283, 353, 504 IPC were made out against him and one Brijendra. In respect of the same incident giving out a differing version of the events of 20.12.2013, FIR No.99/2014 came to be filed on 15.03.2014—after about two and half months following the complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. by the petitioner—Dr. Sanjeev Gupta against the police officers and the officials of the JMC for alleged offences under Sections 323, 341, 504 IPC. The case of the petitioner in the said FIR is that the police officers and the officials of the JMC were seeking unlawful removal of Brijendra who earns his livelihood by running a cart (Thela) within the compound of the petitioner's clinic. The case of the petitioner in the said FIR is that the police officers and the officials of the JMC were seeking unlawful removal of Brijendra who earns his livelihood by running a cart (Thela) within the compound of the petitioner's clinic. According to the petitioner, on seeing the poor helpless Brijendra misbehaved by the officers aforesaid who attempted to forcibly drag him out from the petitioner's shop area, the petitioner then sitting in his clinic intervened and informed the Enforcement Team about the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maharastra Ekta Hawkers Union & Anr. vs. Municipal Corporation, Greater Mumbai & Ors., decided in Civil Appeal No.4156-4157 of 2002, on 09.09.2013, but without avail as the team did not pay any heed. It has been submitted that the petitioner thereafter complained to the higher officers of the police (unnamed), who instead of doing justice to the petitioner and ensuring that their subordinates did not act in contravention of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, threatened him, earlier having lodged an FIR malafidely against him. It has been submitted that in spite of a representation by the petitioner supported by documentary evidence (i.e. photographs taken at the time of incident) to the Commissioner of Police, Jaipur, no steps have been taken for doing justice to the petitioner. Hence, these two criminal misc. petitions, one seeking quashing of FIR No.409/2013 where the petitioner is an accused and transfer of investigation / overseeing investigation in FIR No.99/2014 where the petitioner is a complainant. 3. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner, perused the two FIRs in issue and the petitions. 4. In my considered view, the jurisdiction of this Court interfering with the criminal investigation is extremely narrow. It is ordinarily only when no cognizable offence is made out from the reading of the FIR in issue and a question arises about the jurisdiction of the police to investigate a matter or exceptionally in cases of palpable malafide, ex-facie evident. In my considered opinion, in the facts of the case at hand neither of the grounds are made out for quashing of the FIR No.409/2013 dated 20.12.2013, registered at Police Station Moti Dungari, District Jaipur City (East) against the petitioner for offences under Sections 283, 353, 504 IPC. In my considered opinion, in the facts of the case at hand neither of the grounds are made out for quashing of the FIR No.409/2013 dated 20.12.2013, registered at Police Station Moti Dungari, District Jaipur City (East) against the petitioner for offences under Sections 283, 353, 504 IPC. It is to be noted that the FIR No.99/2014 dated 15.03.2014 by the petitioner, was filed about two and half months subsequent to the FIR against him. There is presently no occasion or material before this Court to comment on the veracity of the events as detailed in the two FIRs as it would obviously be a matter of investigation by the Police. There is also no material before this Court presently to conclude that the police is not investigating the matter fairly and in accordance with law, the apprehension of the petitioner aside. The Police is always expected to investigate into an FIR objectively, bonafidely, fairly and expeditiously and it is so also expected in the two FIRs at hand which, the counsel for the petitioner admits, have been tagged together and transferred from the Police Station Moti Dungari, Jaipur where Police Officers are accused (FIR No.99/2014) and are being now investigated by Police Station Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur. However as the palliative to the petitioner, I would direct that the investigation in the two FIRs by the Investigating Officer attached to the Police Station, Bajaj Nagar be overseen by an Officer in the IPS cadre. 5. Both the petitions are accordingly disposed of.