Punaji Rajaram Saratkar vs State Of Maharashtra
2003 Latest Caselaw 676 Bom

JUDGMENT

R.S. Mohite, J.

1. Heard Shri Ghare, Advocate for the applicant and Shri Agarwal, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. This is an application filed by the Investigating Officer for expunging the remarks made by the J.M.F.C. Court No. 11, Akola, in para 9 of the judgment dated 11-4-2002 delivered in R.C.C. No. 250 of 2001.

4. It appears that on 17-11-2000, the complainant by name Kachru filed a report against accused Nos. 1 to 4 alleging that his daughter Mayawati was absconding along with her four children. It was the case of the complainant that in the year 1992, his daughter Mayawati married with the accused Ramesh and had gone to reside at her husband's house. She has thereafter begotten four children. However, whenever she used to come to meet him, she used to state that her husband and in-laws i.e. accused Nos. 1 to 4 used to give ill-treatment to her on account of domestic matter. On 7-2-2000, her husband had rushed towards Barshitakli to inform the complainant that Mayawati and her four children were missing. Since they could not be traced, the complainant filed the report alleging ill-treatment by the accused to his daughter on account of which she has ran away with her four children.

5. After investigation, the Investigating Officer filed a charge-sheet. The Magistrate took cognizance of the matter and the charge was framed under section 498-A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and trial proceeded. At the stage of trial, Mayawati could not be produced as a witness as she could not be traced. The Investigating Officer was, therefore, examined as P.W. 2 and ultimately, the impugned order came to be passed, acquitting all the accused.

6. In my view, once the cognisance was taken by the Magistrate after application of mind, it ought not be said that the charge-sheet was false or that the police has unnecessarily initiated the proceedings. Insofar as the initiation of proceedings are concerned that is normally done on a presumption that the complaint made is genuine one. There are checks and balances in the Criminal Procedure Code. Even if the charge-sheet is filed, the Court is required to apply his mind before proceeding with the matter. In the entire judgment, there is no specific lapse on the part of the Investigating Officer which has been highlighted. There is no criticism of his conduct nor any specific reason is given as to why the charge-sheet was said to be false. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to allow the prayer of expunging the remarks.

7. In the circumstances, following remarks appearing in para 9 of the judgment dated 11-4-2002 in R.C.C. No. 250 of 2001, will stand expunged.

"In my view unnecessarily police initiated the investigation and prepared the false charge-sheet against the accused without making the proper investigation to prove this offence punishable under section 498-A of I.P.C. against the accused."

The rest of the judgment stands confirmed. Rule is made absolute accordingly.