1

Writ Petition 1048 of 2017.odt

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1048 OF 2017

1]

Hanumant S/o Rajeshwarrao Kulkarni,

Age- 60 years, Occu.- Pensioner,

R/o. Mahalaxmi Residency,

Choudhari Nagar, Tq. & Dist. Jalna.

2]

Vinod S/o. Uttamrao Tambe,

Age- 39 years, Occu.- Service,

R/o. P.T.C. Turchi, Tq. Tasgaon,

Dist. Sangli (Maharashtra).

… Petitioners

(Org. Accused)

Versus

1]

The State of Maharashtra,

Through Police Inspector,

Sadar Bazar Police Station, Jalna,

Dist. Jalna.

2]

Sandip S/o. Bhanudas Palve,

Age- 50 years, Occu- Service,

R/o. Police Training Camp,

Tq. & Dist. Jalna

… Respondents

(Res. No.2 Org. informant)

...

Mr. Swapnil S. Dargad, Advocate for Petitioners.

Mr. R. D. Sanap, APP for Respondent No.1 & 2 / State.

…

CORAM

: SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.

RESERVED ON

: 26^th September, 2022.

PRONOUNCED ON : 07^th October, 2022.

2

Writ Petition 1048 of 2017.odt

J U D G M E N T :

.

The petitioners by invoking Article 227 of the Constitution

of India and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have

sought the following substantive reliefs:

“C.

That the order passed by the Ld. Special Judge,

Jalna in Summary Proceeding No. 01 / 2015 passed

below Exh. 1, dated 7.7.2017, thereby rejecting the

A-Summary Report against the present petitioners,

may kindly be quashed and set aside. / ASJ-4, Jalna.

D.

That, this Hon’ble Court may pleased to pass

necessary writ, order or directions in like nature and

direct the Ld. Special Judge, ASJ-4, Jalna to decide

A-Summary Report afresh as it cannot compel to file

charge sheet.”

2

It is necessary to have a look on the brief facts of the

case, which are important and relevant to decide this petition.

At the relevant point of time, petitioner Nos.1 and 2

were serving in the Police Training Centre at Jalna. Mr. Sandip

Bhanudasrao Palve, Principal of Police Training Centre, Jalna, lodged

FIR with Sadar Bazar Police Station, Jalna. It is stated in the FIR that

3

Writ Petition 1048 of 2017.odt

the present petitioners and others had accepted money from trainee

police constables for giving relaxation in the day-to-day assignment.

The trainee police constables were not getting good quality food. A

news was flashed on the news channel and accordingly, criminal law

was put in motion. It is alleged that the present petitioners and others

(names are stated in the FIR) had accepted huge amount by using

their position. The investigation by ACB was commenced. The

investigation officer after completion of investigation, did not find

sufficient evidence to file the charge-sheet against the present

petitioners. As such, the investigation officer could not apply for

sanction to launch the prosecution against the present accused

persons. The investigation officer submitted ‘A’ summary report

before the learned Special Judge (ACB), Jalna.

3

The learned Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge,

(ACB), Jalna after causing inordinate delay, was pleased to reject ‘A’

summary report and further directed to the investigation officer to

carry further investigation in view of Section 173(8) of the Code of

Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) and after

following legal procedure file final report.

4

Writ Petition 1048 of 2017.odt

4

Heard Mr. Swapnil Dargad, learned counsel for the

petitioners and Mr. Sanap, learned APP for respondent No.1 and 2 /

State.

5

Mr. Dargad, learned counsel for the petitioners invited my

attention to the copy of FIR (page No.17). He pointed out that Crime

No.3150 of 2013 came to be registered at Sadar Bazar Police Station,

Jalna against the petitioners and nine others under Sections 7, 12,

13(1)(5) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on

19^th December, 2013. He pointed out that after thorough

investigation, it was revealed that there was no sufficient evidence

against the petitioners and ot