Bombay High Court
Ashish Devidas Morkhade vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Butibori ... on 26 April, 2022
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
1 47.REVN.106-2022.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (REVN) NO. 106 OF 2022
( Ashish Devidaas Morkhade
Vs.
State of Maharashtra )
Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders
of Coram, Appearances, Court's
orders or directions and
Registrar's orders
Mr. A.M. Jaltare, Advocate for the Applicants.
Mr. Amit R. Chutke, A.P.P. for the Non-Applicant/State.
CORAM: AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATED : 26th APRIL, 2022.
Heard Mr. Jaltare, learned counsel for the
applicant and Mr. Chutke, learned APP for the
non-applicant/State.
2. The present revision challenges that part of
the judgment of the learned Special Judge under the
NDPS Act, and specifically para 6 of the operative part,
whereby the Special I.G. Nagpur and Superintendent of
Police, Nagpur Rural are directed to take action for
registration of crime in appropriate police station and
investigation against PW-10 the applicant herein namely
Aashish Devidas Morkhade, the Investigating Officer for
the offence under Sections 32 and 59 of the NDPS Act,
on the ground, that the default bail was granted due to
the intentional act on part of the present applicant, in not
submitting the charge-sheet within time and not filing
2 47.REVN.106-2022.odt
the reply to the application for default bail. In para 74 to
78 of the impugned judgment dated 08.04.2022, the
leaned Special Judge, has considered the conduct of the
present applicant in the above context, which has
resulted in the aforesaid direction as contained in para 6
of the operative part.
3. Mr. Jaltare, learned counsel for the
applicant submits, that the charge-sheet was ready on
26.11.2021 and was forwarded to the SDPO on the same
day for the purpose of scrutiny, in which, the present
applicant had no role to play. As per the statutory
provision, the last date of filing of charge-sheet was
20.01.2022. It is contended, that the applicant went on
leave on 15.01.2022 and the charge was handed over on
15.01.2022 to the concerned PI and in view of clause 6
of para 354 of the Police Rules Part I, it is contended,
that once the leave was sanctioned and the charge was
handed over, the present applicant was absolved of any
responsibility in the matter of filing of the charge-sheet,
which ought to have been done by the concerned PI who
was in-charge of the matter. Reliance is also placed upon
Mansukhlal Vithaldas Chauhan Vs State of Gujarat, AIR
1997 SC 3400 para 31 to 34, to contend that what has
been observed in para 78 of the impugned judgment,
regarding a direction to sanction prosecution of the
applicant is not permissible. Further plea is raised, that in
light of Section 59(3) of the NDPS Act, it was not
permissible to the learned Special Judge to have taken
cognizance for an offence under Section 59(1) and (2) of
3 47.REVN.106-2022.odt
the NDPS Act, considering the observations in that regard
as have been made in para 78 of the impugned judgment
and direction has been passed as per clause 6 of the
operative part. It is also contended, that since a
departmental enquiry has been ordered to be initiated,
by the learned Special Judge on 28.01.2022, against the
applicant, the leaned Special Judge could have waited
for the report of the enquiry. It is therefore submitted,
that the matter needs consideration.
4. Mr. Chutke, learned APP submits, that since
the investigation was completed on 13.10.2021, the
charge-sheet, could have been submitted for scrutiny
immediately thereafter, however the same has been
intentionally submitted belatedly on 26.11.2021 i.e after
a period of 44 days. The applicant, being a responsible
Officer could not claim any ignorance of the
consequences of such delay. It is submitted, that even
after 26.11.2021, the applicant has not followed up to
the SDPO regarding the scrutiny of the charge-sheet and
its submission within time. Even if, the applicant had
gone on leave on 15.01.2022, the time at his disposal
from 13.10.2021 till 14.01.2022, was more than
sufficient, so as to enable him to ensure that the
charge-sheet was filed within time. It is further
contended, that an application for extention for time as
contemplated by Section 36-A (4) proviso of the NDPS
Act, for the purpose of filing of the charge-sheet could
have been filed, before the time for filing of the
charge-sheet expired and the time could have been got
4 47.REVN.106-2022.odt
extended. It is further contended, that the reply, to the
application for default bail also does not contain any
explanation regarding the delay occasioned.
5. Since, contentious issues are raised, the
matter needs consideration. Issue notice to the
non-applicant for final disposal of the matter at the stage
of admission itself, returnable on 13.06.2022.
6. Mr. Chutke, learned APP waives service of
notice for the non-applicant/State. Reply and all
documents be filed by that time.
7. There shall be ad interim stay in terms of
prayer clause (III) till 13.06.2022.
JUDGE
SD. Bhimte
Signed By:SHRIKANT
DAMODHAR BHIMTE
Signing Date:26.04.2022 19:41
