On a writ petition praying for directions to the police to either transfer investigation or register a new inquiry regarding telephonic extortion threats, the High Court held allegations were false due to unavailability of call data and dismissed the petition.
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
APPELLATE SIDE
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.98 OF 2009
Mukund M. Goradia
Vs.
The Commissioner of Police,
Mumbai & Ors.
.... Petitioner
.... Respondents
S/Shri Madhukar Dalvi i/b Pravin Singhal
for the Petitioner.
Ms A.S. Pai, APP, for the State.
CORAM: BILAL NAZKI &
DATED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2009
P.C:
The petitioner is praying that a
direction be issued to respondent No.6 to take
over the investigation in CR-No.70/98,
registered with the DCB-CID, Anti-Extortion
Cell, Mumbai, CR-No.3/01 and CR-No.2/08, both
registered with the Andheri Police Station,
Mumbai. On instructions, the learned APP
submits that investigations in all the said CRs
have been completed, charge-sheets have been
filed and the cases are pending in Court.
Another prayer is that respondent No.6 should
2
be directed to register and inquire into the
complaint of the petitioner dated 7-11-2008.
The main allegation in the said complaint was
that the petitioner had received telephone
calls from a particular phone number on his
mobile phone and office landline number on a
particular date and a demand of Rs.10 lakhs was
made by the caller and further that in case he
did not satisfy the demand, he was threatened
with life. The respondents have filed their
affidavit stating that on checking the records
from the mobile phone company, they have come
to the conclusion that no such call was made
from the given caller�s number to the recipient
numbers on the said date. It is further stated
in the affidavit that the MTNL, Mumbai in its
report has stated that "data is not available
for the said period". Therefore, the
allegations were false. In this view of the
matter, we do not think any further action is
needed to be taken in the complaint of the
petitioner. The petition is misconceived and
is accordingly dismissed.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a direction to the police to revise registration/inquiry or reopen completed investigations based on false telephonic extortion allegations can be issued.
Whether the petitioner's complaint regarding unsatisfied telephonic extortion threats supported by data not available or false records warrants investigation.
Mukund M. Goradia
The Commissioner of Police, Mumbai
BILAL NAZKI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court