'Accused Not Named In FIR, Remand Report Or Chargesheet': Telangana HC Probe Into Alleged Illegal Detention By Police

The Telangana High Court has directed the Director General of Police to register a crime/FIR and entrust investigation to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or CB-CID on a petition alleging illegal detention, coercion and abuse of authority by police officials.A Single Judge Bench of Justice N. Tukaramji observed:“This inconsistency raises serious concerns regarding the legality of the petitioner's alleged detention. If the petitioner was not formally shown as an accused, his production before the Magistrate would not arise. The respondents' version, therefore, appears incongruent with the record, warranting closer scrutiny. While allegations relating to coercion, execution of GPA, and seizure of documents involve disputed questions of fact not amenable to adjudication under writ jurisdiction, the inconsistencies in the respondents' stand and the prima facie material necessitate an independent and impartial investigation.”The Court was dealing with a writ petition filed by Jogaram Lohar, an agriculturist and permanent resident of Rajasthan, alleging that officials attached to Banjara Hills Police Station, acting with private individuals, unlawfully apprehended him and demanded delivery of 40 kilograms of silver.The petitioner alleged that he was forcibly transported to Rajasthan and confined at Jain Bhavan, where he was subjected to custodial violence, physical coercion and intimidation. He further claimed that on 01.03.2018, at Bhinmal Court Complex, he was compelled under duress to execute documents resulting in creation of a fabricated General Power of Attorney in favour of respondent No.13.It was also alleged that original title documents relating to agricultural land admeasuring Ac.3.00 guntas in Jalore District were unlawfully seized, as part of a “premeditated and concerted attempt” to illegally usurp his property.The petitioner further alleged that he was again illegally detained between 14.03.2018 and 16.03.2018 at Pranav Lodge, Hyderabad, and that a false case in FIR No.44 of 2018 under Sections 420, 406 and 379 IPC was shown pending against him in collusion with private respondents.The petitioner contended that the actions of the police authorities violated his right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. Relying on D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, he argued that the alleged detention and custodial torture were in breach of mandatory safeguards governing arrest and detention.On the other hand, the respondents submitted that the writ petition was misconceived and filed to challenge lawful police action taken pursuant to Crime No.44 of 2018. It was contended that the FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint by respondent No.10, and that investigation disclosed prima facie involvement of the petitioner and others in offences relating to cheating, criminal breach of trust and theft of silver ornaments.The respondents further asserted that the petitioner and other accused were arrested in compliance with the Code of Criminal Procedure, produced before the competent Magistrate and remanded to judicial custody. They also stated that after investigation, a charge sheet was filed and the case was taken on file as C.C. No.1827 of 2018 by the III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.It was further submitted that the parties subsequently entered into compromise under Section 320 CrPC, culminating in settlement before the Lok Adalat on 14.07.2018. The allegations of illegal detention, custodial violence and coercion were denied as “baseless, belated, and afterthoughts.”The Court noted that the dispute originated from a commercial transaction involving supply of silver ornaments, where the complainant alleged inducement, failure to discharge financial obligations and theft of approximately 60 kilograms of silver ornaments.At the same time, the Court observed that two competing narratives emerged: the petitioner's case of illegal detention, custodial torture and coercion, and the respondents' assertion of lawful investigation arising from a commercial dispute culminating in criminal proceedings and settlement.Referring to Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa, the Court observed that violation of Article 21 by State actors gives rise to a public law remedy, including compensation.The Court found that although the respondents asserted lawful arrest and remand, the records relating to Crime No.44 of 2018 did not reflect the petitioner's name in the FIR, remand report or charge sheet. However, certain police communications referred to the petitioner, thereby lending prima facie support to his claim that he was apprehended despite not being formally arrayed as an accused.In such circumstances, the Court held that entrusting the matter to an independent agency was essential “to uphold the rule of law, ensure transparency, and preserve public confidence in the administration of justice.”Accordingly, the Court directed the Director General of Police to cause registration ...

'Accused Not Named In FIR, Remand Report Or Chargesheet': Telangana HC Probe Into Alleged Illegal Detention By Police

Ananya Tangri

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Ananya Tangri

'Accused Not Named In FIR, Remand Report Or Chargesheet': Telangana HC Probe Into Alleged Illegal Detention By Police

Ananya Tangri

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Ananya Tangri

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers