Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has directed the Director General of Police (DGP) to appoint an officer from the State CID, of Deputy Commissioner or of equal rank, to probe a December 2018 complaint to the then Thane Police Commissioner by an accused in a cheating case.
The complaint stated that he supplied electronic goods procured from a businessman to Kasarvadavali Police Station in Thane and also to a police officer, but was not paid for them.
Today’s Rate
Wenesday 30 Oct. 2024
“The allegations in the complaint are quite serious. First of all, it is hard to understand how the police officers from a particular police station can take such expensive articles from a private party without following due procedure. Secondly, if the allegations are true, some serious action needs to be taken,” said Justice Sarang Kotwal and Justice Neela Gokhale in their order.
They quashed the December 20, 2018, FIR and trial pending before a Magistrate Court against Nainesh Panchal with the consent of complainant Mohammad Khan. The FIR stated Khan has an electronics showroom in Bhiwandi. Panchal, claiming to have a shop, took delivery of 14 air-conditioners to sell for a commission, but did not pay Khan. He gave excuses and his cheques were dishonoured, causing Khan a Rs 4.2 lakh loss. Thereafter, both settled the matter.
Panchal moved HC to quash the FIR. “The dispute between the parties is purely personal and commercial in nature. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this petition,” the judges said. The judges then took note of “a disturbing feature in this case. They referred to the Decemer 20, 2018 complaint written by Panchal to the Commissioner of Police that he supplied air-conditioners, water coolers, a computer, LED TV, printer, etc., to the police station worth over Rs 6 lakh, but was only paid Rs 4.2 lakh.
Police inspector (Crime) Nasir Kulkarni purchased over Rs 11 lakh worth of electronic items for his office and home, but paid him only Rs 2 lakh. He was not given his money despite asking for it. In fact, when Panchal went to the police station in his friend’s car, Kulkarni forcefully took the car to his place and parked it in his building premises. Panchal’s advocate Sachin Thorat said as a counterblast to the December 20, 2018 complaint, the FIR was filed three days later on December 23, 2018. Panchal told the judges nothing came out of his complaint to the CP.
Thereafter, though electronic items from the police station were returned, he suffered heavy losses, resulting in his default in paying Khan. The judges directed the appointed officer to conduct an inquiry expeditiously and within three months and submit a report. They posted the matter for compliance and further consideration on February 5.
Advocates Sachin Thorat and Prajwal Thorat appeared for the petitioner. Additional Public Prosecutor Ashish Satpute represented the State. Advocate Dnyaneshwari Utpat represented the complainant.
