IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH
VINAY JOSHI, BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, JJ.
Ankit S/o. Radheshyam Biranwar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Police Station Ram Nagar, Gondia - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 327 of 2022
Decided On : 03-04-2023
Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 226 and 227 - Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 - Section 482 - Seeking various reliefs in nature - Writ of prohibition - Reinvestigate offence - Evidence - Prosecution witnesses - Whether exceptional powers are to be exercised depends upon Court’s satisfaction based on - Held, It has been submitted that though investigation papers contain statements of eye witnesses they are not reliable - It is submitted that prior test identification parade was not conducted and all disclosure statements are inadmissible - Basically this is not stage to decide credentials of witnesses as it is a matter of appreciation at time of final adjudication - Admissibility of disclosure statement cannot be prejudged in this petition - As regards to non-holding of prior test identification parade is concerned same is not requirement of law - It is well settled that identification in Court is a substantive evidence - All these aspects cannot be dealt with at midst of trial and court refrain ourselves from commending on worth of said material - Writ Petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Vinay Joshi, J.
Considering the controversy involved in the matter and by consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, Criminal Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission by issuing Rule, making the same returnable forthwith.
2. The petitioner is an accused in First Information Report bearing Crime No.399/2019 registered with Ram Nagar Police Station, District Gondia for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 364–A and 120–B of the Indian Penal Code. He has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking various reliefs in the nature of issuance of a writ of prohibition, directing trial Court, not to proceed with the concerned criminal case namely Sessions Trial No.71/2020. The petitioner also seeks writ of mandamus thereby directing the respondent police authorities to reinvestigate the offence, and also prayed for his release on bail.
3. Police Sub-inspector - Amol Sonwane lodged a report on 17.12.2019, on the basis of which the aforesaid crime has been registered. The prosecution case in brief is that, a missing report has been filed with the concerned police reporting that a young boy aged 20 years namely Saurabh Katare, went missing from his house. On 15.12.2019 around 2 p.m., Saurabh received a phone call on which he left the house by riding a two wheeler. Saurabh did not return till the late evening. The family members have searched for Saurabh, however, they could not find him, therefore uncle of Saurabh namely Komal Katare, has filed a missing report, which was registered vide No.42/2019.
4. During the course of investigation, the police have obtained call details of Saurabh’s cell number. It was transpired that the last four calls on the cell phone of Saurabh were received from cell No.7030240945. The said Cell number was whatsapp number of the petitioner Ankit. Accordingly the police have verified the call details of the cell number of the petitioner Ankit. It was transpired that at relevant period other three co-accused where in constant touch with him, and therefore, the needle of suspicion went against the petitioner Ankit and his three friends.
5. During enquiry the petitioner Ankit has disclosed that he has hatched a conspiracy to abduct Saurabh for ransom of Rs.30 lakhs. In accordance with their plan, on 15.12.2019 around 2 p.m. they called Saurabh on his mobile, near MIET College Gondia. Accordingly, Saurabh went to the place by his two wheeler. Already petitioner’s three friends had arrived at said place by a four wheeler bearing registration No.MH 49-AT-0988. No sooner Saurabh came to the spot, all of them caught hold and forcibly made him to sit in the car. Co-accused Raju assaulted Saurabh at his face by beer bottle. They made Saurabh to lay at foot place of the car. Thereafter three companions of petitioner Ankit along with Saurabh went ahead by car. Petitioner Ankit followed them by two wheeler. They took Saurabh at longer place, but, the condition of Saurabh became worse. Therefore they decided not to go for ransom, but, to eliminate Saurabh.
6. The car was made to stop near a small bridge of village Mudhapar. All of them have tied sellotape around the face of Saurabh, as well as his legs were tied by sellotape. Saurabh was throttled in the car. They got assured that Saurabh is dead. Petitioner asked his companions to throw the dead body into the river. It was revealed that the co-accused acted at the instance of petitioner, took dead body near Bagh River, tied a big stone by scarf and threw the dead body into the river.
7. On the basis of said information, the police have registered Crime No.399/2019 and carried investigation. During the course of investigation, statement of relevant witnesses came to be recorded. At the instance of accused, memorandum Panchnama was drawn and articles have been seized. Panchnama of the scene of offence was drawn. Clothes of
SupremeToday
The investigation must be unbiased, honest, and just, and fair investigation is a part of the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The power to dire....
Judicial intervention in criminal investigations is warranted to ensure fair process and public trust when local authorities are ineffective or biased.
The court established that the right to a fair investigation is fundamental, and failure by the police to uphold this right necessitates judicial intervention.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to order reinvestigation by an independent agency under exceptional circumstances to ensure a fair and just investigation, as....
The magistrate has no power to order further investigation suo motu or on the request of the complainant/informant after cognizance is taken and the accused person appears, nor does the magistrate ha....
Black money transaction - seeking investigation - Orders have been issued by Deputy Inspector General of Police without ascertaining factual details, Petitioner has not made any verification about co....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of fair investigation in ensuring fair trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It establishes that unless there is a serious irregularity....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.