Bombay High Court Slams Police for Procedural Lapses, Orders Action Against Officer’s Non-Compliance.


16 January 2024 Bail and Antcipatory Bail >> Criminal Law   |   Criminal Trial >> Criminal Law  

In response to the ongoing case and directions issued on December 27, 2023, the police apprehended Respondent Nos. 5 and 6, who were later granted bail by the trial court. The court noted that the primary dispute between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 6 could potentially be resolved through mediation with the help of legal counsel, with a meeting scheduled to discuss the issue further.


 

 

During the proceedings of Faruk Kabir v/s The State of Maharashtra & Others, it was pointed out that the Investigating Officer, in the case of CR No. 756 of 2023, failed to serve a notice under Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) to the accused before their arrest. Instead, the notice was served to the mother of one of the accused in violation of Supreme Court directives in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar. The Court expressed concerns over this breach and the irregularities in maintaining the case diary, which violated provisions under Section 172(1-B) of the Cr.P.C. Despite circulars from the Director General of Police (DG) and the Home Department on maintaining case diaries, the record showed non-compliance, highlighting the negligence of the investigating officer.

As a result, the Court directed the Director General of Police to personally look into the matter and take appropriate legal action against the officer for not adhering to the established protocols. The Court emphasized the importance of compliance with orders and set a deadline of four weeks for remedial action.


Section 41., Code of Criminal Procedure - 1973  

Section 172., Code of Criminal Procedure - 1973  

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973