Dismissed

Prabhakar Savlaram Bhalshankar v. Prabhakar Sahebrao Nagre and Another

Bombay HC2 Dec 2014WP/295/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal writ petition challenged the inaction of an investigating officer regarding arrests under sections 379, 420, 34 IPC despite rejected anticipatory bail. The Court noted allegations of false affidavits but held that opportunity must be given before action for perjury. The petition was dismissed without recommending action against the officer.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of as dismissed; no action for perjury was taken against the Investigating Officer.

Prabhakar Savlaram Bhalshankar Vs Prabhakar… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

1 Cr WP 295/2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

Criminal Writ Petition No. 295 of 2013

¶4

Prabhakar S/o Savlaram Bhalshankar. .. Petitioner.

¶5

Versus

¶6

Prabhakar S/o Sahebrao Nagre And Others.

¶7

.. Respondents.

¶8

Shri. Sachin S. Deshmukh, Advocate, for petitioner. Shri. H.A. Joshi, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Shri. Rupesh C. Bora, Advocate holding for Shri. A.B. Girase, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Shri. B.L. Dhas, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent No.2-A.

¶9

CORAM: T.V. NALAWADE, J.

¶10

DATE : 2^nd DECEMBER 2014

¶11

ORDER:

¶12

The petition was initially filed for seeking direction against respondent No.2 for taking appropriate steps as contemplated under section 157 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By making amendment prayer was added for taking action under section 195 of the Indian Penal Code against added respondent No.2, Investigating Officer of Crime No.160/2012 registered in Georai Police Station.

¶13

2 Cr WP 295/2013

¶14

The grievance of the present petitioner, original complainant against the investigating officer is that the investigating officer was helping the accused who were involved in the case punishable under sections 379, 420, 34 etc. of the Indian Penal Code and he was avoiding to make their arrest. Application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the accused was rejected by this Court. Even after that no concrete steps were taken by respondent No.2 as per the case of the petitioner. The added prayer is in in respect of some contents of affidavit filed by respondent No.2 in the month of June 2013. The Investigating Officer had contended that accused was not available and so he could not make further investigation and the accused could not be arrested. However, the submissions made show that the accused came to be arrested. Police Custody Remand was obtained against him and then the Judicial Magistrate granted bail to the accused.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner is relying on some documents like copy of application given by accused Prabhakar in the police station on 21-5-2013 to show that

¶16

3 Cr WP 295/2013

¶17

Prabhakar was very much available and false contention was made in the affidavit filed. This document bears signature of Head Constable, PSO to show that application was received and the second document pertains to the Court. It can be said that there is possibility that the Investigating Officer did not act even after rejection of application filed for anticipatory bail. In such a case action can be definitely taken against the Investigating Officer even for perjury on the basis of such contentions made in the affidavit when Court finds that there was inaction on the part of the Investigating Officer. This Court presumes that the Investigating Officer must have learnt lesson from the present proceeding as he is made party to the present proceeding and aforesaid observations are made by this Court. But taking action of perjury is within the discretion of the Court. This Court holds that opportunity needs to be given to the Investigating Officer and in the present matter there is no need of such action. In the result, the petition is disposed of as dismissed.

¶18

Sd/- (T.V. NALAWADE, J. )

¶19

rsl

Prabhakar Savlaram Bhalshankar v. Prabhakar Sahebrao Nagre and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhakar Savlaram Bhalshankar v. Prabhakar Sahebrao Nagre and Another

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

MD Rafiuddin MD Aminoddin Maniya and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Parasram Pandurang Anbhule and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sangamnath Revanappa Satanure Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Manoj Subhashappa Mule Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Balaprasad Gyaniramji Joshi Vs Sanjay Mulchandra Pande and Anr.

Balasaheb@Ahsok Abasaheb Galdhar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others