Disposed

Mervan Feroze Cama v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC2 Sept 2013WP/579/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding allegations of investigative laxity and involvement of senior police officers, the Bombay High Court directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police to supervise investigations, assured personal access for the petitioner, and declined to transfer the case to C.B.I. at this stage.

What did the court decide?

The matter was left open with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner of Police to supervise investigations; no transfer to C.B.I. or State C.I.D. was ordered at this stage.

Mervan Feroze Cama Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

2.wp.579.13.doc

¶2

Shephali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 579 OF 2013

¶5

Mervan Feroze Cama. ....Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others. ....Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil for the Petitioner. Mr. J. P. Yagnik, APP for the Respondents.

¶8

CORAM: S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & G. S. PATEL, J.J.

¶9

DATED : SEPTEMBER 2, 2013.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

On this matter, we had directed the learned APP to take instructions and particularly about the grievance of the Petitioner that the investigations in F.I.R. No. 157 of 2012 registered on 22^nd August, 2013 by the Vimantal Police Station are not been carried out in accordance with law in as much as the supplementary statement, C.C. T.V. footage is not been looked into.

¶12

The Respondent No. 3 is not taking any steps because some senior level police officers are also involved in the case.

¶13

The Petitioner states that he has narrated the role of all these officers in the commission of the offence in his supplementary statement dated 23^rd January, 2013.

1 of 3

2.wp.579.13.doc

Shephali

In such circumstances, the instructions that the learned APP has received from the office of the Commissioner of Police, Pune City are that now all investigations in this crime and which are being investigated by one Shri. Valture, Police Inspector, UnitIV, Crime Branch, Pune City would be supervised by one Shri. R. R. Bansode, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch, Pune City.

¶18

The said Deputy Commissioner has issued necessary orders and communications for and on behalf of the Commissioner of Police, Pune City. After taking instructions in the Court, Mr. Yagnik, learned APP informs that the Petitioner can see the Deputy Commissioner personally on 4^th September, 2013 at 11.00 a.m. in his office, namely, the office of the Commissioner of Police, Pune City/office of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Pune City.

¶19

We have no doubt in our mind that once the investigations are being monitored and supervised by such a high level officer that he will not turn a blind eye to the grievance and complaint of the Petitioner that there is a laxity shown in the investigations deliberately and to protect senior level police officials. The investigations are not progressing because of their involvement in the crime.

¶20

We have not doubt in the event such allegations disclose a serious lapse on the part of the Investigating Official, the Supervising and Monitoring Authority will take note of the

2 of 3

2.wp.579.13.doc

Shephali

same and then direct the course of investigations in a particular manner so that all guilty are brought to book and even initiate disciplinary measures in addition against all these who are part of the police force.

¶25

We do not find that this is a fit case for transferring the investigations to the Central Bureau of Investigation or the State C.I.D. and we leave that issue open after the report is filed in the competent Court. In the event, the Petitioner is not satisfied with the investigations carried out in addition to raising a grievance once again before the Trial Court, he can approach this Court and satisfy it that this is a fit case for transferring the investigations. Our order passed today shall not conclude any of these remedies and the grievances therein. The Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶26

(G. S. PATEL, J.) (S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶27

3 of 3

Mervan Feroze Cama v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mervan Feroze Cama 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pushpa S. Khater Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Moreshwar Shriram Bhoir Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Tejas Surendra Khandhar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arvind Mahadeo Pusalkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Santosh Sopan Padtare and Ors. Vs Hanmant Dnyanu Jagdale, Secretary Lokmanyanagar Shikshan Mandal and Ors.

Arvind Mahadeo Pusalkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.