VINODBHAI MANGAJI THAKOR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking to transfer the investigation from the respondent No.7-Police Inspector, Mansa Police Station, to any other Police Officer.

(2.) BRIEF facts are that a complaint was filed by Vinodkumar Mangaji Thakore(the petitioner No.1 herein) on 14-11-2010 before Mansa Police Station against 41 persons registered as C.R.No.I-141 of 2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 326, 324, 323, 452, 435, 436, 337, 427, 504 and Sec.506(2) of IPC and Sec.135 of Bombay Police Act inter alia alleging that there was a Puja and Yagna in one Mahakali Temple situated in the Village Ridrol, District Gandhinagar, for three days from 12th to 14th November, 2010 and on that day lunch was arranged for the entire people. However, at 12 noon, when the people from Thakore community started taking steel dishes, Ranchhodbhai Ambalal Patel, Tulsibhai Dahyabhai Patel and other persons of Patel community present there asked the persons of Thakore community to take paper dishes instead of steel dishes insulting Thakore community persons. Thereafter, at about 1 p.m. people from Patel Community came to the Village and one Ranchhodbhai Ambalal Patel gave siren at the compound of Milk Producers Cooperative Society collecting a mob of about 500 persons of Patel Community and assaulted the Thakore community persons and also set on fire their houses causing damage to their houses and injuries to several persons. He gave names of 41 persons who could be identified from the mob. As one of the injured died during treatment, Sec.302 of IPC was added. On registration of the FIR, police started investigation. According to the petitioners, the Investigating Officer is trying to save the real culprit by involving innocent persons and he is carrying out a dishonest investigation. Hence, the present petition has been filed to transfer the investigation from the present Investigating Officer i.e. respondent No.7 to any other Police officer.

(3.) LEARNED APP, Mr.L.R.Pujari, for the respondent No.1 has submitted that it is not true that a dishonest investigation is being carried out by the Investigating Officer. However, he has submitted that if this Court feels that the investigation is not going in the right direction, appropriate order may be passed.