The discretionary powers of the investigating officer in arresting an accused, especially in cases of heinous offences against women, and the need for cautious exercise of such powers.

JUDGMENT

Ravindra V. Ghuge, J. -

1. We have quoted a very meaningful statement of Abraham Lincoln which sends out a strong message, as an epigram before beginning to write this order, since this case has brought up a contentious issue as regards a police officer deviating from his duties purportedly under the influence of the accused politician.

2. This petition was filed on 16.03.2021. The petitioner/ original informant has put forth prayer clauses (b), (d) and (f) as under :-

"b) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction whereby the respondent No.2 to arrest the accused in FIR No.806 of 2020 registered with respondent No.2 immediately."

"d) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction for transfer of investigation of FIR No.806 of 2020 registered with respondent No.2 to any independent agency such as CBI, CID or any other Police Station."

"f) Considering the conduct of respondent No.2 this Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to conduct an enquiry against the investigating officer and after due enquiry strict action be taken against the erring officer of respondent No.1."

3. On 05.04.2021, after considering the submissions of the learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and the learned prosecutor, we had passed an order running into seven pages and containing 12 paragraphs. Before we could sign the order, as the transcript was not yet ready, the learned Chief Public Prosecutor moved a motion at 10:30 AM on 06.04.2021 stating that some material facts were required to be brought before this Court, which would have an effect on the result of the petition. Such vital facts were not brought to our notice and as we had not yet signed the order, the matter may be listed for further hearing. We granted circulation to the learned Chief Public Prosecutor, so as to list this petition today, by asking him to intimate the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

4. The transcript of our order dated 05.04.2021 is ready by way of a rough draft and the same is before us. Since we have not signed it and since all the parties were agreeable for a hearing today, we are keeping the draft order aside. However, to maintain transparency in judicial proceedings, we are marking our draft order dated 05.04.2021 as "X-1", which will be tagged to the petition paper book.

5. Today, we have considered the extensive submissions of the learned Chief Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State and the learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the petitioner.

6. This matter was listed before us on 01.04.2021 when we passed the following order :-

"1. We have heard the submissions of the learned Senior Advocate Shri R.S. Deshmukh along with Shri A.P. Avhad, learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned prosecutor on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Respondent No.3, Union of India, is a formal party.

2. We have perused the F.I.R., registered on 26.12.2020 bearing F.I.R. No.0806 of 2020.

3. The learned prosecutor seeks time to take instructions.

4. Considering the grievances voiced in this petition, the I.O. Shri Ashok Uttamrao Giri shall remain personally present in the Court, on 05.04.2021.

5. List this petition on 05.04.2021, for passing orders."

7. We were informed on 05.04.2021 that the Investigating Officer is not Mr.Giri, who is present in the Court. The Investigating Officer was actually Ms.Ashlesha Patil, Police Sub-Inspector, who officiated as such till 30.12.2020. She was removed, for reasons not divulged to the Court. Thereafter, Mr.Nishikant Bhujbal, Assistant Police Commissioner, Cidco Region, Aurangabad city, had taken over the investigation from 31.12.2020. We ar