A Magistrate is not bound by the investigative agency's opinion in a police report and may independently take cognizance of offences based on the material on record. For law enforcement officials accused of serious crimes, higher standards of accountability warrant strict judicial scrutiny regarding the risk of trial obstruction.

JUDGMENT:-

1. The Applicants seek their release on bail in connection with FIR No. 0039 of 2025 dated 26th August 2025, registered with the Coastal Police Station, Kadaiya, Daman, for offences punishable under Section 140(2), 308(7) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’). The Police filed the Final Report No. 37 of 2025, before the JMFC, Daman, on 17th October 2025. Pertinent to note is that, while filing the Final Report, the investigating agency has dropped the non-bailable offences as initially applied in the FIR and retained only offences punishable under Sections 308(7), 258, 238, 241, 3(5), 115(2) of the BNS, 2023. Thus, the offences as alleged by the Police against the Applicants and Co-accused in the charge sheet, as on date, are all bailable offences.

2. The facts of the case in brief are as under:

2.1 On 25th August 2025, the Complainant namely, Aajessh Patel and his friends, traveled to Daman from Surat, in an Innova car. They purchased liquor from a wine shop and intended to have a party in a farmhouse. 5 to 6 persons intercepted them, searched their vehicle, and having spotted the liquor, identified themselves to be police officials. They directed the Complainant and his friends to accompany them to the Police Station. The Complainant and his friends, intimidated by the Police, acted as per their instructions and followed them to the Police Headquarters. These persons, were none other than Police Constables, Head Constable and a Police Officer from the Crime Branch, Daman, Union Territory of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu. The Applicants are three constables.

2.2 The Complainant and his friends were made to sit in a room on the ground floor of the Police Headquarters, their mobile phones were seized, they were taken to an upstairs room, slapped a couple of times and interrogated. Another Police Officer arrived whose presence was intended to further intimidate them. The Complainant showed to the Police the receipt of the purchase of liquor, however, the Police deliberately declared it as a fake and threatened to implicate them in offences punishable with 14 years of imprisonment. The Complainant and his friends, getting a drift of the intent of the Police personnel and, out of fear, offered to pay some money for their release. The Applicants and others immediately demanded an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- as a price for releasing the Complainant and his friends.

2.3 Another Police Officer arrived to negotiate with the Complainant since the Complainant conveyed his inability to raise such a huge amount. Finally, the Complainant was told to arrange an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-. His mobile phone was returned to him to enable him to call his relatives/friends. The call was monitored by the Police on the speaker mode. The Complainant first called his mother who did not answer, hence, he called his friend, Vicky Patel and requested him to inform his mother the requirement of Rs. 10,00,000/- for his release in a liquor case.

2.4 Another neighbor, Bhavin called Aajessh on Vicky’s phone and assured him that they were arranging the money and later at around 8 pm, conveyed that they were leaving with the money. The Police demanded the live location of Vicky and Bhavin and were monitoring their location through calls. When Vicky reached Daman, three Police personnel left the Headquarters with the Complainant; two sat with the Complainant in the Innova, while another followed on a Splendor bike. The Complainant was directed to tell Vicky to hand over the money to persons following the Innova in a Swift car. Bhavin refused to hand over the money to any person other than the Complainant and mentioned that he was able to manage only Rs. 5,00,000/-.

2.5 The Police were hearing the conversation on speaker phone and expressed anger at the deficit amount and reiterated their demand. Ultimately, Bhavin agreed to pay Rs. 7,00,000/- immediately and balance Rs. 3,00,000/- on the next day. The Po