The Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the legality of police adding sections of P.C.R. Act and Atrocities Act to a case register after two months. The Court held the act was not illegal as investigation warrants the new allegations.
The writ petition stands dismissed.
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 Cri WP 239/12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 239 OF 2012
Suresh s/o Narsing Tour & Ors.
V E R S U S
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Petitioners
Respondents
Shri M.L. Dharashive, Advocate for the petitioners
Shri N.H. Borade, APP for respondents/State
CORAM : A.V.NIRGUDE, J. DATE : 25th April, 2012
PER COURT :
1.This petition challenges the legality of the
charge-sheet filed against the petitioners by Police
Station Killari, District Latur, for the offences
punishable under Secs. 147, 148, 149, 324, 336, 323 of
I.P.C., under Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act, under
Sec. 7 (1) 3 of P.C.R. Act, under Sec. 3 (i)(x) of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tries (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act and under Sec. 506 of I.P.C.
2.The objection is raised mainly because the
police initially registered offence vide Crime No. 90 of
2011 only under the above mentioned sections of I.P.C.
and under Section 135 of Bombay Police Act. After almost
two months, the police added the above mentioned sections
of P.C.R. Act and of Atrocities Act to the case. Before
2 Cri WP 239/12
they added these additional sections, police have
informed about the same to the Court vide application
dated 10thJanuary, 2012. The learned Magistrate
apparently did not pass any order on the application save
and except he recorded the word “seen” above his
signature.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners now
asserts that this addition of above mentioned sections is
illegal and should be set aside. He, however, made no
assertion as to on what basis he makes the demand. The
police have clearly stated in their application dated
10th January, 2012, that during the investigation, they
recorded statements of other witnesses who made specific
allegations which made out offence punishable under
Section 7 (1) 3 of P.C.R. Act, under Sec. 3 (i)(x) of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tries (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act and under Sec. 506 of I.P.C. I do not
think, this act on the part of the police is not illegal.
It is justified, and therefore, petition should fail.
The writ petition stands dismissed.
SRM/25/4/12
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the police addition of sections of P.C.R. Act and Atrocities Act to a crime register after two months without prior court order is illegal.
Whether the petitioners have established a basis for setting aside the additional sections in the charge-sheet.
5 provisions across 4 enactments
Suresh s/o Narsing Tour & Ors.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
A.V. Nirgude
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court