Ganesh S/O. Arvindrao More vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 8227 Bom

                                       (1)                      cri. application 4163.17

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD


              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4163 OF 2017


      Ganesh s/o Arvindrao More,
      Age: 57 years, Occ.: Service as
      Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Dound,
      Pune Rural, Tq. and Dist. Pune.                     ...      Applicant

                      Versus

      1] The State of Maharashtra
      Through Secretary Home Department,
      Mantralaya, Mumbai.

      2] The Additional General of Police,
      C.I.D. Pune.                                  ...            Respondents
                                   -----
Mr. Anil M. Gaikwad, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mrs. M.M. Nerlikar, APP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
                                   -----

                                   CORAM :   S. S. SHINDE &
                                             MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

RESERVED ON : 06.10.2017 PRONOUNCED ON : 13.10.2017 ...

JUDGMENT: (Per Mangesh S. Patil, J.)

. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of

parties heard finally at admission stage.

(2) cri. application 4163.17

2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure for quashing of criminal proceeding bearing Crime

No.I-14/2010 registered with Karjat Police Station on 24.01.2010 as well

as further proceedings therein to the extent of the applicant.

3. The checkered and rather murkier facts leading to the

present application may be summarized as under:

One Crime no. 99/2009 was registered with Baramati Police Station

for an offence punishable under Section 454, 457 and 380 of the Indian

Penal Code. The investigation was being carried out by Assistant Police

Inspector Mr. S.G. Bhosale. The petitioner was in-charge of the Baramati

Police Station as Police Inspector at the relevant time. One Janardhan

Kale was a suspect and with the permission from the petitioner and the

oral instructions of the Superintendent of Police, some police personnel

took Janardhan to Karjat, District Ahmednagar, apparently for recovery of

stolen property. Unfortunately, when the police party along with

Janardhan took a halt near a Dhaba, Janardhan tried to cross the road

hurriedly by gesturing that he was going for answering nature's call.

When one of the police rushed after him all of a sudden Janardhan was

knocked down by a truck and sustained grievous injuries. The police

(3) cri. application 4163.17

party took him to Baramati for treatment but unfortunately he

succumbed to the injuries.

4. The wife of the deceased Janardhan filed Writ Petition

No.1494 of 2011 at the Principal Seat of this High Court and the Division

Bench inter alia directed the State Government to pay compensation and

also directed the Director General of Police to nominate an officer of in

the rank of Additional Director of General of Police to look into all the

aspects of the case surrounding death of Janardhan in suspicious

circumstances, to ascertain if it was an accidental or homicidal. It was

also directed that Departmental Proceedings initiated against all the

police personnels including the petitioner may go on.

5. Accordingly, the departmental proceedings were conducted

and apparently the petitioner was exonerated. However, the Investigating

Officer moved an application in Crime No. I-14/2010 on 20.07.2016 and

roped in the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 348 r/w

34 of the Indian Penal Code for wrongful confinement of Janardhan. The

petitioner, therefore, is seeking to quash and set aside the criminal

proceeding.

(4) cri. application 4163.17

6. We have carefully gone through police papers and the entire

record. At the cost of repetition, we must observe that indeed the facts

described herein-above deserved the adjective murkier. Without the

deceased being taken into custody formally he was carried to places even

outside the jurisdiction of Baramati Police Station. We are unable to

digest the theory of alleged road accident in which the deceased has

died. It is also surprising that, instead of fetching him some urgent

medical treatment at nearby places the police party has carried the

deceased in the injured condition to Baramati which is not less than 100

kms from the spot of the alleged accident. We do not intend to go into

all these details in as much as the department has already initiated

departmental proceedings against all the concerned police personnels

including the present petitioner and it will take its own course. We are

referring to these circumstances to point out as to how prima facie there

is material to infer that the deceased was being detained with the

express or tacit consent of the petitioner who was In-charge of the

Baramati Police Station at the material time. Even the Competent

Authority has granted sanction for his prosecution for wrongful detention

and we are satisfied that there is absolutely no ground much less as laid

down in the case of State of Haryana V. Bhajanlal; AIR 1992

(5) cri. application 4163.17

Supreme Court 604 to quash the criminal proceeding.

7. In view of such state of affairs, by no stretch of imagination

can it be said that the petitioner is being prosecuted either mala fide or

without any basis. Therefore the application is liable to be rejected. The

application is rejected. Rule is discharged.

8. We make it clear that the observations made herein before

are prima facie in nature and confined to the adjudication of this Criminal

Application. This order will not preclude the Applicant from availing of an

appropriate remedy as available in law in the event of filing charge-sheet

by the Investigating Officer.

     [MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]                        [S. S. SHINDE, J.]




KAKADE