2019 Supreme(Del) 2343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, J.
Kartar Singh & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
The State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi) & Ors. - Respondents
Crl.M.C. 4192 of 2019
Decided On : 04-12-2019
For the Petitioner: Mr. Mahipal Singh Drall, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. K.K. Ghai, APP., Sunil Kumar, SHO/Alipur. Mr. Atul Guleria, Adv. with Mr. Gautam Mann, Adv.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory registration of FIR and the discretion of the Magistrate in directing investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Headnote:
ILLEGAL DETENTION - POLICE BRUTALITY - 107/151 CR.P.C., 186/353/506 IPC - The judgment discussed the illegal detention and police brutality against the petitioners and their son. The court analyzed the impugned order dated 06.02.2019 and the application of judicious mind. The court also referred to the case of Lalita Kumar Vs. Govt. of U.P. & Ors 2014 (1) JCC 1 and Priyanka Srivastava & Anr. Vs State of Uttar Pradesh &Ors (2015) 6 SCC 287 to highlight the mandatory registration of FIR and the discretion of the Magistrate in directing investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to set aside/quash the impugned order dated 06.02.2019 passed by the learned ASJ, (North) District Courts, Rohini Courts Delhi, alleging illegal detention and police brutality against the petitioners and their son.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no illegality and perversity in the impugned order dated 06.02.2019 and dismissed the petition.
Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged illegal detention and police brutality against the petitioners and their son, and the application of judicious mind in the impugned order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court referred to the case of Lalita Kumar Vs. Govt. of U.P. & Ors 2014 (1) JCC 1 and Priyanka Srivastava & Anr. Vs State of Uttar Pradesh &Ors (2015) 6 SCC 287 to highlight the mandatory registration of FIR and the discretion of the Magistrate in directing investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Final Decision: The court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it.
JUDGMENT :
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby to set aside/quash impugned order dated 06.02.2019 passed by learned ASJ, (North) District Courts, Rohini Courts Delhi in the interest of justice and equity.
2. Brief facts of the case are that in the intervening night of 29/30.08.2018 at about 1:00 AM, petitioner No.1 was informed by Mr. Vikas, friend of Mr. Ashish Kumar s/o petitioner No.1, that Ashish Kumar has been arrested by the local police and taken to Police Station, Alipur, Delhi. Petitioner No.1, at about 1:46 AM, contacted Police Station, Alipur at landline No.011-27202265 asking whereabouts of his son. The Duty Officer informed petitioner No.1 that no person named Ashish Kumar has been arrested or detained in Police Station, Alipur, Delhi.
3. Thereafter, petitioner No.1 contacted said Mr. Vikas on his mobile and shared with him information supplied by the Duty Officer qua Ashish Kumar. However, said Mr. Vikas reiterated his information qua arrest of Ashish Kumar and told petitioner that he was waiting for petitioner no.1 outside the police station.
4. Thereafter, petitioner No.1 along with his wife went to Police Station Alipur and met said Mr. Vikas outside the police station. Petitioner No.1 then went inside the police station and inquired from the Duty Officer again, whether his son has been brought by the police in PS Alipur. The Duty Officer again replied that he has not received any information of the arrest of Ashish Kumar and asked the petitioner No.1 to search for him in IO Rooms. The petitioner No.1 went to the IO Room and found his son Ashish Kumar and his two friends namely Rajat S/o R.N. Singh, Vishal S/o Sh. S.K. Jangid in the room of S.I. Manoj (respondent No.2), where constable Dipesh, Const. Jaideep and H.C. Amarjeet Singh were also present. At that time S.I. Manoj Kumar was sleeping in his room on a bed. The petitioner No.1 asked S.I. Manoj (respondent no.2) on what grounds his son has been arrested. SI Manoj told the petitioner No.1 that he has handed over the matter of his son to S.I. Sandeep(respondent no.3) and sent his son in the room of S.I. Sandeep (respondent no.3). In the police station Ashish Kumar stated to the petitioner No.1 that he has been beaten by the police without any reason and stated the names of the police officials to the petitioner no.1.
5. The petitioner No.1 stated to S.I. Sandeep (respondent no.3) that Ashish Kumar is his son, and he is an Advocate by profession and requested S.I. Sandeep (respondent No.3) to release his son Ashish Kumar on bail but S.I. Sandeep (respondent no. 3) refused to do so and he misbehaved and manhandled and used abusive language against the petitioner No.1. When Ashish Kumar objected to this S.I. Sandeep ordered H.C. Dinesh Kumar to beat Ashish Kumar and at the instance of S.I. Sandeep, H.C. Dinesh Kumar started beating Ashish Kumar in his presence without registering any case against him. Then S.I. Sandeep (respondent No. 3) ordered a person who was in civil dress to prepare search memo and arrest memo of Ashish Kumar and Const. Dipesh and Jaideep illegally and unlawfully snatched Rs.2,800/- from him and beat him mercilessly.
6. At the time of preparing the arrest memo, S.I. Sandeep stated to the petitioner No.1 that he has registered a case against Ashish Kumar U/s 186/353/506 IPC. Upon being asked to supply a copy of the FIR S.I. Sandeep (respondent no. 3) said that copy of the FIR will be supplied at 06:30 AM in morning in the presence of SHO. Ashish Kumar informed him that S.I. Manoj (respondent No.2), Ct. Dipesh Malik and Ct. Jaideep had beaten him mercilessly. When the petitioner No.1 requested to release his son on bail, then S.I. Sandeep (respondent no.3) told that Ashish Kumar will be released at 06:30 in morning before the SHO and he used filthy and abusive language against the petitioner No.1. Thereafter, H.C. Dinesh Kumar and HC Dipesh Malik started scuffle with the petitioner No.1 and started beating Ashish