RAMJIBHAI JIVABHAI RABARI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Shri Mengdey, ld. APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent State. With the consent of parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, - original complainant has prayed for an appropriate order directing the respondent authority to transfer the investigation of C.R. No. I 129 of 2007 from Ghatlodiya Police Station to any other independent agency or any other higher authority.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that on 9-6-07 at about 12:30 p.m., an incident has taken place in which one Shri Shivnani, Police Inspector, his son and other persons are accused for the offence punishable u/s 323, 294-B, 506(1), 392 and 114 of the IPC. That the petitioner approached Ghatlodiya Police Station along with the relatives and friends for registration of the complaint. Upon hearing the petitioner, Shri MK Padhiyar, in charge Police Inspector, Ghatlodiya Police station called Police Inspector Shivnani and the complaint of the petitioner was not registered. It is the case of the petitioner that as the police authority was trying to register false case which was reflected from their talks, brother of the petitioner sent fax massage to high authority about the same at about 7:46 p.m. on 9-6-07. It is the case of the petitioner that the copy of the fax dated 9-6-07 was produced in the police station and thereby false complaint of Arvind Vataliya (son of the Police Inspector Vataliya) was registered against the friend and relatives of the petitioner being C.R. No. 128 of 2007 at about 21:45 hours on 9-6-07. It is the case of the petitioner that said Police Inspector Shivnani gave slap to Jigar in the police station in presence of PSI Pathan, for which N.C. Complaint is filed which was also taken after 4 hours and 45 minutes of the incident. It is the case of the petitioner that after registering the complaint of other side, complaint of the petitioner was registered at about 22:45 on 9-6-07 and at that point of time all the five persons who are named as accused in the complaint of other side were present but not arrested. It is the case of the petitioner that PSI Pathan of Ghatlodiya Police Station filed affidavit before the Court in anticipatory bail proceeding that accused persons of the aforesaid FIR are absconding and thereby, the learned Sessions Court rejected the said application. It is the case of the petitioner that this Court granted anticipatory bail to the accused of C.R. No.128/07 and directed to remain present on 9-7-07. On 9-7-07, all the five persons remain present in the police station and the petitioner was also present but no arrest was made and police authority recorded statements in their own manner and not in the words of the accused. It is the case of the petitioner that till date nothing has been done in the complaint filed by the petitioner and no progress is made, on the contrary when on 9-7-07, the petitioner inquired and requested for steps in the complaint, Police Inspector Zala gave threats of dyer consequences and threaten that if the petitioner will insist for action, then arrest will be made and remand will be asked. It is the case of the petitioner that the police authority is favouring the accused persons of aforesaid FIR as they are police officials, more particularly, Police Inspector Shivnani and no arrest is made in the complaint of the petitioner though the anticipatory bail application has been rejected by the learned Sessions Court. It is submitted that as the accused persons are the police officials and his relatives, the petitioner is apprehending that he will not get any justice as the complaint filed by the petitioner being C.R. No.I 129 of 2007 would not be inquired into in a fair manner and in a right direction and therefore, it is requested to hand over the investigation of complaint being C.R. No.I 129 of 2007 to the ACP as the petitioner has no faith in Ghatlodiya Police.