CAV ORDER

Heard.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is a complete shoddy investigation was carried out by the police who are in hand in gloves with the accused. He would submit that in between the date of incident on 30.05.2018 to 31.05.2018, the incident happened. After the incident, one Suresh Khunte was made a Complainant/ Informant/ Dehatinalicy.

Subsequently, there was public agitation broke out for proper investigation. The house wherein four murder took place was under the CCTV surveillance. It is stated the recording of the incident would have been in the CCTV, but police did not seize the DVR to support the accused. He would submit subsequently in the press conference, the Superintendent of Police came out with a statement that the DVR has been seized, but the case diary or the final report is silent about such seizure. It is contended there is no seizure of DVR was made which is a serious lacuna as the entire incident was recorded in the DVR. He further submits that Dharmendra Bariha was made an accused by report of Suresh, who was subsequently found to be accused. He was arrested on 02.06.2018. He further submits that the narco test carried out on Dharmendra Bariha would reveal the motive and the incident. Referring to the first affidavit filed by the State, it was stated that the police came out with a stand that the DVR was not seized. However, in the second affidavit, it was stated that the DVR was not in functional condition; therefore, that is not made part of the evidence. Therefore, there is serious contradiction about the artificial intelligence of eye-witness. Referring to the narco test, the counsel would submit the earlier charge sheet was filed on 30.08.2018 and supplementary charge sheet was filed on 19.07.2019 which has changed the entire scene. Referring to the affidavits, he submits that the narto test reveal that there was an allegation of sexual assault but no investigation is carried out by the police in this aspect. He further submits that narco test also reveal that the accused armed with weapon entered into the house, this aspect has also not been investigated. Therefore, the police was helping the accused for the reason that the accused were involved in business of alcohol and drugs for which monthly payment was being made to the police, which is revealed in the narco text. He further submits that the production of the DVR before this Court in physical form would show that on day one the DVR was seized which had recorded the entire incident. Therefore, if the DVR is manipulated, the sole intention to save the accused would be to fore, who were along with the police. He further submits that there may be chances that the DVR might have been changed during such long custody of the police, as such, further investigation requires to be done by other agencies as the police has completely failed to carryout. He further submits that in the pre test interview of narco test, the name of one Lokesh also appeared but there is no investigation on this part.

2. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the investigation in the angle of rape was not carried out for the reason that in the post mortem no injury was found on the private parts of one of the deceased, a lady. He further submits that the Axe which was used as weapon was recovered from the pond, therefore, on the basis of that recovery the accused were arrested and FSL was carried out. It is stated after the narco test, proper enquiry was made and supplementary chalan was filed against the accused persons on the basis of DNA test and other recovery. Therefore, the investigation as carried out was proper and the real culprits were arrested after the thorough investigation and recovery. Therefore, no further investigation would be necessary.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents filed along with the petition and the case diary.

4. The petitioner is a family head of four people who w