Bombay High Court
Sunil S/O Gulabrao Thakare And 2 ... vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Mahuli ... on 14 December, 2022
Bench: G. A. Sanap
1 crwp791.22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.791 OF 2022
1. Sunil s/o Gulabrao Thakare
Aged 54 years, Occ: Agriculturist,
2. Ganesh s/o Gulabrao Thakare
Aged 50 years, Occ: Agriculturist,
3. Sudhir s/o Gulabrao Thakare
Aged 48 years, Occ: Agriculturist,
All R/o Mahuli (Jahagir), Tq. & Dist. ... PETITIONERS
Amravati
---VERSUS---
State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer, Police
Station Mahuli, Dist. Amravati
...RESPONDENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for petitioners.
Shri A.R. Chutke, APP for respondent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : G.A. SANAP, J.
DATED : DECEMBER 14, 2022.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally at
the admission stage with the consent of learned advocates for the
parties.
2. The order challenged in this petition is dated 11.10.2022
passed by the learned Special Judge granting the application made
::: Uploaded on - 15/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 15/12/2022 19:31:15 :::
2 crwp791.22.odt
by the investigating officer for conducting "Psychological
Evaluation Test" of the accused persons. It is to be noted that after
investigation 'A' Summary was filed on 26.06.2021. Before final
decision on the 'A' Summary, the investigating officer made an
application seeking permission to conduct the Psychological
Evaluation Test of the accused persons. The application was made
on 11.10.2022. The learned Special Judge by one line order allowed
the said application without recording the reasons or without
recording his satisfaction. It is pertinent to note that the accused,
who were directed to undergo the test, were not heard in the matter.
The accused being aggrieved by this order have approached in this
petition.
3. I have heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Perused the record and proceedings.
4. It is undisputed that the accused were not heard by the
learned Special Judge before passing the order. The order passed by
the Special Judge may have serious repercussions and cascading
effects on the petitioners. It was therefore necessary to hear the
petitioners/accused before passing the order. The learned Special
::: Uploaded on - 15/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 15/12/2022 19:31:15 :::
3 crwp791.22.odt
Judge has not stated even the reason for not granting an opportunity
to the accused to reply to this application. In my view, therefore, this
order cannot be allowed to stand, as it has caused prejudice to the
accused. The learned Special Judge, on the basis of the vague
application made by the investigating officer, thought it fit to have
some material on record to pass the final order on the 'A' summary
submitted by the investigating officer. In my view, therefore, the
order is required to be set aside.
5. Perusal of the application made by the investigating
officer seeking permission to conduct test would show that it is as
vague as vagueness could be. Therefore, in my view, if in exercise of
this kind was necessary then it would have been by application of
mind. The exercise by making vague application was half hatted
exercise. In my view, in order to do complete justice, besides, setting
aside the order, it would be necessary to grant liberty to the
investigating officer to make a proper application with reasons in
support of the prayer. Accordingly, I pass the following order:
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. The order dated 11.10.2022 passed by the learned Special
4 crwp791.22.odt
Judge is set aside.
iii. Liberty is granted to the investigating officer to make a
proper application supported by reasons and documents for
making such prayer before the learned Special Judge within a
period of two weeks from today.
iv. The learned Special Judge shall grant an opportunity of
hearing to the accused and decide the same in accordance with
law.
Rule made absolute in above terms.
JUDGE
Wagh
