Probe cases on builders in 90 days, says Bombay High Court
THE ASIAN AGE. | KALPESH MHAMUNKAR
Published Nov 20, 2016, 1:09 am IST
Updated Nov 20, 2016, 7:20 am IST
The Bombay High Court expressed surprise that two years has been completed but a charge sheet had not been filed yet.
Mumbai: If the police officer investigating any case against a builder fails to finish the investigation within 90 days and files the charge sheet, he will be answerable to the commissioner of police directly. The Bombay high court has directed the Mumbai police commissioner to evolve a mechanism to ensure that investigation of offences against builders and developers is completed within 90 days.
On failing to do so, the commissioner shall seek an explanation from the investigating officer (IO) on why he failed to complete the investigation.
The court also directed that if the commissioner feels the answer by the IO isn’t satisfactory then adverse remark should be made in the records of such officer which will be confidential.
This direction has been given by the division bench of Justice V.M. Kanade and Justice Nutan Sardesai who were hearing a criminal writ petition under which Shekhar Puranik, a builder, had approached the court for quashing of a criminal proceeding against him which was initiated by the Tardeo police station for duping a woman.
According to the petition, a woman had registered a complaint with the Tardeo police against Puranik alleging he had sold her flat to another person. For that he had duplicated signatures on the documents.
On October 14, the complainant and the builder had settled the matter between them and the builder had paid Rs 16 lakh to the woman.
On cross verification with the complainant, she stated that if she continues with the matter, she and her husband will have to go the court every month and there was no guarantee that the matter would be disposed of within a reasonable period of time.
She further stated that moreover if she had deposited this amount in the bank, in five years the same amount would have doubled.
The court also expressed surprise that two years has been completed but a chargesheet had not been filed yet. The police had informed the court that hand-writing expert’s opinion was not obtained in time and therefore, the chargesheet had not been filed. The court was not satisfied with the answer and directed the commissioner of police to inquire into the matter.
Brief Description of the Decision:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1268 OF 2016
Shri Shekhar P. Puranik & Others. … Applicants.
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents.
Mr. S. Sathyanarayanan, Advocate for the Applicants.
Mr. Rupesh Zade a/w. Shailesh Chavan, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
Shri Patel S. Y., A.S.I. to Tardeo Police Station is present.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE AND Ms. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI,JJ.
DATE : 16th NOVEMBER, 2016
