STATE Vs. SHIVAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard the learned Government Pleader on merits. The charge against the accused is one under Section 392 of the IPC and the facts of the case disclose that this is an obnoxious and antisocial offence insofar as the gold chain belonging to P. W. 1 was snatched from his neck at about 6. 30 p. m. on 19-10-2002 on the Temple Road near Sibara Gate. The learned Government Pleader is right when he points out that this is one of the cases which would have resulted in a separate conviction because P. Ws. 1 and 2 who are uncle and nephew were travelling on a motor-cycle and they had stopped the motor-cycle because of a conversation between the P. W. 1 and the accused. The accused was known to them. He was seen by them because it was in the day time and there would have been absolutely no doubt about the fact that the Court could have convicted the accused because the police have recovered the gold chain from the accused. Unfortunately, on the crucial evidence of recovery the evidence of the Pancha is highly unsatisfactory, but the prosecution could have easily overcome this through the evidence of the i. O. For some strange reason despite repeated summons and a non-bailable warrant the I. O. never appeared before the Court and ultimately, this non-appearance has proved fatal to the prosecution. In the absence of the recovery evidence a conviction becomes legally impossible and that recovery evidence could only have come in this case from the I. O. In all criminal proceedings the evidence of the J. O. is extremely crucial and absolutely necessary because apart from the narration of the investigation there is primary evidence which comes from this quarter and more importantly contradictions, omissions etc. , are required to be proved. through this witness. Short of a situation where the I. O. has died, we see no ground on which the prosecution can get away with non-examination. We are conscious of the fact that having regard to the time factor the Officer who has investigated the case would in all probability have been posted to some other place but with the present day communications it is not difficult to contact the Officer and ensure the Officer's presence. The fact is that there are too many gaps that emanate and nobody appears to be serious about ensuring that the prosecution is properly conducted and that it is successfully presented. This Court has repeatedly brought it to the notice of the Home department and the D. G. (Police) that the law and order situation gets grossly undermined due to the absence of the Investigating Officers and that necessary steps be taken to ensure that the Court process is immediately and promptly served on the Officer concerned and secondly, that follow-up steps are taken to ensure that the Officer complies with the summons or warrant that emanates from the Court. We have been informed that circulars have been issued, directions have been issued and the corrective steps have been taken and we have confidence in the government and the authorities that this has been done. Further, since this is an area that requires vigilant follow-up we once again direct the registrar General to forward a copy of this order to the Secretary to government, Home Department and to the Director General of Police so that they are aware of the damage that is occurring in this class of cases and appropriate follow-up action can be taken.

(2.) ELABORATING further, what we need to point out is that instances of the present type such as chain snatching, pickpocketing etc. , have very highly disturbing fall out on the victims and it is not in many of the cases that the law enforcement authorities are able to bring the real offenders to book This case was an unusual one where the accused was arrested within 1 hours and the property recovered from his pocket and despite that, if it is to end in an acquittal only because of the want of the requisite evidence that too from the police department, we consider that it is not only sad but that it is also atrocious. We would prefer to direct, the authorities to ensure that instances of this type do not ever recur.

(3.) FOR the reasons set out earlier the appeal fails on merits and stands dismissed. In view of the grounds set out in I. A. No. I delay is condoned. LA. No. I is allowed. The Registrar General to act on the directions regarding forwarding of copies.