JOWETT D'SOUZA Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Made returnable forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. The grievance of the petitioner is that the investigation has not been properly conducted in respect of the complaint made by the petitioner, as according to the petitioner some police official is also involved in the matter.

(2.) This Court by order dated 30/01/2014 has dealt with the issue and it granted time to the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor to take specific instructions about the course of further investigation in the matter and the authority by which the investigation could be made.

(3.) Today the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has submitted that the investigation would be handed over to the Crime Branch of Panaji. As suggested by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has agreed that the investigation could be got done through a police officer of I.P.S. cadre. The statement of the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor is accepted. In view of the allegations made in the complaint, we are also of the view that the investigation should be conducted by an Officer of I.P.S cadre. We reiterate that we have not looked into the merits of the matter in view of the submissions made on behalf of the parties. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. In the circumstances, no costs. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has requested that some observations in the earlier orders passed by this Court, which according to him are adverse to the respondents, may be expunged. It is clarified that the observations in the orders passed by this Court at various stages of the matter are prima facie observations.