Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/2116/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 2116 of 2008
======================================
MILAP
RAMESHBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS
======================================
Appearance
:
MR RD DAVE for Applicant.
MR
IM PANDYA, APP for Respondent No.1.
None for Respondent Nos.2 -
3.
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
Date
: 24/10/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. The
present petition invoking Articles 14, 21 and 226 of the Constitution
is filed with a prayer to direct the respondent investigating officer
and D.S.P., Surendranagar, their servants and agents not to harass
the petitioner or his family members under the guise of investigation
pursuant to criminal complaint registered as C.R.No.I-7 of 2008 with
Sayla Police Station, Sayla, District ? Surendranagar. The
petitioner has also sought an order to set aside the complaint and by
way of interim relief restrain the respondents from continuing with
investigation against the petitioner. Upon notice being issued to
the respondent, investigating officer, Assistant Sub Inspector, Shri
R.R.Parmar and Dy.S.P., Shri K.V.Baria have remained personally
present with the papers of investigation. It was reported by learned
APP, on instructions and after reference to the papers, that by the
account of several eye-witnesses it had come out during the course of
investigation on the very next day that the car bearing same number
as that of the car admittedly owned by the petitioner was involved in
the accident resulting into death of the victim. That would mean
that for more than nine months, the person driving the vehicle at the
time of accident was required to be identified and there were no
fetters on investigation on all available clues. Admittedly, the
investigating officer did not once even issued a notice under Section
160 of Criminal Procedure Code and, as submitted by learned APP,
investigation machinery was waiting for the petitioner to report at
the police station. In the meantime, a summary report of
investigation was already submitted in the Court concerned on
3-8-2008, keeping the right of further investigation open.
2. Above
facts prima facie reveal
utter disregard for the duty of properly and expeditiously
investigating serious offences resulting into death of a person and
practically abuts on complicity with the accused. It was under such
circumstances stated by learned APP that at least now investigation
will be taken over by Dy.S.P., and appropriate report of
investigation will be submitted as expeditiously as practicable. The
above facts, however, prima facie, reveal
a very sorry state of affairs and viewed from the standpoint of the
original complainant, it could be very disheartening to see
helplessness of the police in investigating a serious offence. Such
delay in investigation could as well have other consequences for
proper prosecution and claim of compensation which could be made by
heirs of the victim.
3. Therefore,
taking serious view of above state of affairs, Superintendent of
Police of Surendranagar District is directed to file a detailed
affidavit as regards progress of investigation and lapses, if any,
found on the part of any of his subordinate officers and state as to
whether any actions are taken for such lapses, if any, or proposed to
be taken for improving working of law enforcement machinery under
him. If such delay in investigation of serious offences are common
and justified, Superintendent of Police may also explain on affidavit
reasons for such delays or lapses, if any, being common or justified.
Affidavit shall be filed by the next date of hearing, which is fixed
on 21st November 2008.
(D.H.Waghela,
J.)
*malek
Top