The High Court disposed of a suo motu PIL regarding the suicide of a Police Inspector. The court relied on an enquiry report noting uncertainty about false evidence but concluded no further action was required.
Suo motu criminal PIL was disposed of with no further direction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE
SUO MOTU CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO.3 OF 2001
High Court of Judicature at Bombay
(on its own motion)Petitioner
vs.
State of MaharashtraRespondent
None for the petitioner.
Mrs.P.H.Kantharia, A.P.P. for the State.
CORAM : R.M. LODHA &
ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ.
DATED : 1st February 2006
P.C.
We perused the enquiry report submitted by 1st
Additional Principal Judge in respect of the case of
suicide by Police Inspector Shri Iqbal Abdul Quadir
Bargir. The report runs into typed foolscap 51 pages.
In the report, Shri A.J.Dholakia observed thus:
"65. To sum up, I am of the view that
P.I.Bargir committed suicide leaving behind
the note Ex. 7. He committed suicide because
of the thought that an innocent person got
convicted on the basis of false evidence
collected by him allegedly at the instance of
delinquent Nandkumar Chaugule. However, the
evidence adduced before me does not go to
indicate that the witnesses gave false
deposition in the said sessions case. I have
refrained from making any observations on the
merits of the findings given in S.C.No.901-95
by Addl. Sessions Judge Smt.M.R.Bhatkar. It
is only in the appeal which is pending against
the said decision that truth or otherwise of
the evidence adduced in the said case and
merits or demerits of the decision given by;
the learned trial Judge while convicting the
2
said accused can be considered. It is only in
the said appeal it can be ascertained whether
the said evidence was false as alleged in the
suicide note or it was genuine as observed in
the said decision."
2. In view thereof, we are satisfied that nothing
further is required to be done in the suo motu criminal
P.I.L. and the same is disposed of accordingly.
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
High Court of Judicature at Bombay
State of Maharashtra
R.M. LODHA
ANOOP V. MOHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court