Disposed

Chandrani Hanumant Atkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Jan 2011WP/2538/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court considered a petition seeking transfer of a murder investigation to the C.B.I. or C.I.D. The court accepted assurances that publication against an absconding primary accused would be issued and that a complaint regarding an in-custody assault was under investigation. Consequently, the petition was disposed of without further immediate order.

What did the court decide?

No further order in the petition; liberty to move the concerned court later to assist the prosecution.

Chandrani Hanumant Atkar Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

wp-2538-10.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

Criminal Writ Petition No. 2538 of 2010

¶6

Smt Chandrani Hanumant Atkar .. ..Petitioner.

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra & ors .. .. Respondents.

¶9

Mr S.V. Marwadi with Shri B.A.Lawate, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶10

Mr A.S. Gadkari, A.P.P.for the State.

¶11

CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR &

¶12

A.R. JOSHI, JJ.

¶13

DATED : 18TH JANUARY,2011.

¶14

P.C.:-

¶15

Heard Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional

¶16

Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶17

By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for transfer of the

¶18

investigation either to the C.B.I. or C.I.D. Counsel for the

¶19

¶20

wp-2538-10.doc

¶21

petitioner, in the first place, submitted that statement of

¶22

Somnath Atkar has not been recorded in respect of crucial

¶23

aspect. Insofar as this submission, in particular, as to how

¶24

the photos captured in the mobile camera were converted

¶25

into compact disc and by whom, learned APP submits that

¶26

the I.O. has no difficulty in recording further statement of

¶27

said Somnath Atkar and any other person with regard to the

¶28

making of the compact disc which has been produced along

¶29

with the charge sheet in the Court.

¶30

The next aspect brought to our notice by the

¶31

Counsel for the petitioner is that the Investigating Officer

¶32

has not taken any steps against the absconding accused

¶33

No.6, who is the prime accused. He submits that even the

¶34

I.O. concedes the position that accused No.6 is the main

¶35

accused and if he is arrested it will be possible to trace out

¶36

¶37

wp-2538-10.doc

¶38

main person on whose instructions the incident in question

¶39

has happened. Insofar as this submission is concerned, we

¶40

are in agreement with the learned counsel that merely

¶41

because the absconding accused does not have any landed property, would not extricate the I.O. to take steps of publication against such accused to notify about the fact that he is absconding and wanted in connection with the pending criminal case. Learned APP on instructions of the I.O. submits that even this measure will be undertaken by

¶42

him forthwith.

¶43

We are assured that proper application will be filed

¶44

before the concerned Court to issue publication against the absconding accused No.6 u/s 82 of the Cr.P.C. within two

¶45

weeks from today. That assurance is accepted.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner has then invited our

¶47

¶48

wp-2538-10.doc

¶49

attention to the Press News at page 413 and 414 which

¶50

refers to the episode as unfolded in the court campus where

¶51

one of the accused was assaulted and attacked by another

¶52

accused with knife, although both the accused were in

¶53

police custody and were being produced in the Court at the

¶54

relevant time. Learned APP submits that the said incident

¶55

has been taken serious note of by the Appropriate Authority

¶56

and in fact the police complaint has been lodged and which

¶57

is being thoroughly investigated.

¶58

In view of the above, the learned counsel for the

¶59

petitioner submits that for the time being no further order is

¶60

warranted in the present petition. He submits that the

¶61

petition be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move

¶62

the concerned court at the appropriate stage if and when

¶63

occasion arises to assist the prosecution and also to ensure

¶64

¶65

wp-2538-10.doc

¶66

that the offence which is registered against the accused

¶67

relating to murder of the petitioner’s husband is taken to its

¶68

logical end.

¶69

Accordingly this petition is disposed of on the above

¶70

terms.

¶71

(A.R.JOSHI,J)

¶72

(A.M. KHANWILKAR,J)

Chandrani Hanumant Atkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrani Hanumant Atkar v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikrant Ramesh Chandwadkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vikrant Ramesh Chandwadkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sohit Shravankumar Saadh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Tulsidas Nair and Anr. Vs Chairman, the Human Rights Commissioner New Delhi and Anr.

Onkar G. Ganvir Vs State through Cbi, Acb, Mumbai

Susheela Rao Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.