(1)

criwp703.20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

940 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.703 OF 2020

WITH APPLN/2018/2020 IN WP/703/2020

SANDIP S/O. EKNATH AMBHORE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Mr. A. S. Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner

Mr. S. W. Mundhe, APP for the respondents/State

CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATE: 14^th DECEMBER, 2022

P. C.

1.

Grievance of the petitioner is that he was accused in

the Crime No. 176/2020 registered against him. He was called

by the police on 09.00 am on 27-05-2020 and he was produced

before the learned JMFC on 28-05-2020 at 12.45 pm. Thus in

the submission of the learned advocate for the petitioner that he

was in custody and was arrested at 09.00 am on 27-05-2020 and

was produced after 24 hours before the court and thus the

police have committed irregularities. His prayer therefore is to

initiate appropriate action against the Investigation Officer of

Nava Mondha Police Station, Parbhani. To facilitate this court to

1 of 4

(2)

criwp703.20

come to a proper conclusion call CCTV footage. Since everything

was revolving around CCTV footage of two days to ascertain

whether he was really arrested or not. This court had issued

direction to the authorities to produce on record the CCTV

footage. When it was informed that CCTV footage is preserved

only for 15 days. Now it is not possible to produce the same

before this court. In view that by order this court had called for

information about storage capacity, model of the CCTV footage

etc. However, no affidavit was filed. It is only now the affidavit is

filed on 13-12-2022 giving the details of the CCTV, model of the

CCTV, storage capacity alongwith communication dated 31-12-

2020 is annexed wherein Superintendent of Police, Parbhani had

supplied the information that CCTV installed in Nava Mondha

Police Station is of HikVision Company having storage capacity

of 15 days only.

2.

Thus, now one thing is clear that CCTV footage is

not available and therefore, only thing is open to the court to go

through the material that is available on record as on today so

2 of 4

(3)

criwp703.20

as to come to a conclusion that whether the applicant was really

arrested at 09.00 am on 27-05-2020 as alleged or he was

arrested at some other time thereafter.

3.

To come to conclusion now the material available on

record is the order dated 16-06-2020 passed by the learned

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Parbhani wherein he has recorded

grievance of the petitioner that he was produced after

completion of 24 hours before the learned Magistrate. The

learned JMFC had perused the case diary and on the basis of

that he recorded that the accused was interrogated from 09.00

am to 03.00 pm on 27-05-2020 and it is only at 04.32 pm

accused came to be arrested and was further produced before

the court on 28-05-2020 at 12.45 pm. It is also further observed

that there was a recovery of weapon from the petitioner and

same was seized. It is seen from the remand report that arrest is

shown as 16.32 pm on 27-05-2020. Thus, today there is no

material to show that the petitioner was in fact arrested at 09.00

am on 27-05-2020. The petitioner further made submission that

he had given the application on 10-06-2020 itself to the

3 of 4

(4)

criwp703.20

Superintendent of Police, Parbhani. He has clearly stated in the

said application that he could have been immediately released

on bail. He had requested to release him on bail. However, same

was denied. In the said communication he has clearly requested

to call for CCTV footage. This communication shows that there

is endorsement of receipt by inward and outward section of the

office of Superintendent of Police. He submits that in spite of

this CCTV footage was not preserved. However, as on today no

relief can be granted as prayed for by the petitioner. This court

requests authorities to ensure that CCTV footage is preserved for

long time so as to avoid further complications and loss of

valuable evidence which would be nece