Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 528 (PAT)

Kumar Gaurav v. State of Bihar

2023-04-24

SANDEEP KUMAR

body2023
Constitution of India—Article 226—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 173—Alleged Police harassment—Officer-in-Charge of Gandhi Maidan Police Station has produced station diary showing that he had gone to shop of petitioner to verify a complaint—In station diary name of complainant as well as details of complaint are not mentioned—This kind of visit by Police disturbs a legitimate businessman—If police get any complaint, it should at least mention name of complainant, his details and a gist of complaint in station diary before proceeding to verify allegations—Henceforth, Police will act in a proper manner—In case, police want to proceed for verification on a complaint, details of the complainant and gist of complaint must be mentioned in station diary—Application dismissed as having become infructuous, with observations and directions. (Paras 4, 5, 6 and 9) Sandeep Kumar, J.—By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:— “i. To protect the shop of the petitioner under the name and style of Mandolian Jewellers Private Limited situated at Flat No.12, A Block, Narmada Apartment, Exhibition Road from wanted interference by the Respondent No.4 from interruption/disruption. ii. To hold that the petitioner has a fundamental right of doing business under the name and style of Mandolian Jewellers Private Limited. iii. To hold that the Respondent No.4 has no power, authority or jurisdiction to demand papers or inspect documents for running of the shop.” 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is local authorized representative and Manager of Mandolian Jewellers Private Limited. The company of the petitioner had launched a scheme which was called as “Gold Vyapar Cashback Package”. The scheme provides incentives to the customers in the form of cashback. It is the further case of the petitioner that because of opening of the shop of the petitioner, there was resentment amongst the owner of the local Jewellery shops and they with the help of local police, managed to inspect the shop of the petitioner on 24.08.2019 during day hours and the police officials of Gandhi Maidan Police Station have illegally arrested the staffs of the petitioner and took away the daily sale register and bill book of the shop of the petitioner. The entire activities of the police officials was captured on CCTV camera. The entire activities of the police officials was captured on CCTV camera. The police officials of Gandhi Maidan Police Station has illegally restrained the petitioner from opening his Jewellery shop and this action of the police created a feeling of terror in the minds of the staffs of the shop of the petitioner. Because of inaction of the Police officials, the petitioner compelled to approach this Court. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that this application has now become infructuous as the petitioner has closed his shop and left the State of Bihar. 4. The Officer-in-Charge of Gandhi Maidan Police Station is present in Court and has produced the station diary showing that he had gone to the shop of the petitioner to verify a complaint. 5. It is surprising that in the station diary the name of the complainant as well as the details of the complaint are not mentioned. 6. This kind of visit by the Police disturbs a legitimate businessman. If the police get any complaint, it should at least mention the name of the complainant, his details and a gist of the complaint in the station diary before proceeding to verify the allegations. 7. Henceforth, the Police will act in a proper manner. In case, the police want to proceed for verification on a complaint, the details of the complainant and the gist of the complaint must be mentioned in the station diary. 8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the D.G.P. Bihar through FAX or e-mail forthwith so that it may be circulated to the Superintendents of Police in the State of Bihar which will protect businessmen from this kind of harassment. 9. The personal appearance of the officer-in-Charge of Gandhi Maidan Police Station is dispensed with. 10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application is dismissed as having become infructuous.