Disposed

Sohail Asgasr Rizwi v. the State of Maharashtra Anr. Ors.

Bombay HC21 Feb 2008WP/13/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court rejected the delay justification for registering a criminal case, ordered an inquiry into allegations against a specific police officer, and disposed of the writ petition without further order on investigation timelines.

What did the court decide?

Directed Commissioner of Police to appoint a superior officer to inquire into allegations against the accused/respondent police officer.

Sohail Asgasr Rizwi Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2008)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 13 OF 2008

¶5

ALONG WITH

¶6

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 34 OF 2008

¶7

Sohail Asgasr Rizwi. .... .... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors.... ..... Respondents.

¶8

Mr. Milan Desai for the Petitioner. Mrs. P. H. Kantharia, Addl.PP for the Respondents. Mr.S. Shaikh for the Intervener.

¶9

CORAM: BILAL NAZKI and S. A. BOBDE, JJ. DATED : 21ST FEBRUARY, 2008.

¶10

P. C.:

¶11

Main relief in this case is that the investigation should be made in C.R. No. 329 of 2007. Although the report had been filed much earlier, the case has been registered only on 29^th December, 2007. The reason given for delay in registration of case makes an interesting reading. The registration of cases should not be dependent on any events or any festival. Whenever the police gets a report of a cognizable offense they are bound to register it immediately and as a law and order machinery they must be

¶12

¶13

responsible for the consequences as well. Therefore, we do not accept the contention raised in the counter affidavit that the offense was not registered in view of the `Bakri Idd'. We are also not happy with the investigation so far done. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation will be completed within a period of two weeks. Therefore, on this count we do not want to pass any further order.

¶14

There are some allegations leveled against one of the Police Officers which need to be examined by a Senior Police Officer. Therefore, let the Commissioner of Police appoint an Officer, not below the rank of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, to look into the allegations leveled against respondent No.2 – Chandrakant Nath Gurav.

¶15

With the above observations the writ petition is disposed of.

¶16

In view of the disposal of the writ petition itself, the Criminal Application for intervention does not survive and is disposed of as such.

¶17

Sd/-

¶18

(BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/-

Sohail Asgasr Rizwi v. the State of Maharashtra Anr. Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohail Asgasr Rizwi v. the State of Maharashtra Anr. Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indur Kartar Chhugani Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sudhir Vijay Shukla and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Dinesh D.Kamat Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shiv Adhar Yadav Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Ramnihor Dhirrao Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Manikchand Vitthaldas Rathod and Ors.