Police Should Take Action After Ascertaining Whether An Incident Actually Took Place Or Not: Patna HC Orders Special Investigation Into Assault On Advocates Over Parking Dispute
The Patna High Court directed a special investigation into a case of assault on two advocates over a parking dispute holding that the police was expected to take action against a wrongdoer on ascertainment of whether an incident actually took place or not.
The Court remarked, “If, in the city of Patna, the Advocates are assaulted by some goons at about 10:00 P.M., this Court cannot accept the incident as an isolated incident, but prima facie holds that the city is not a safe place for any people to reside.”
Two junior advocates at the Patna High Court got into an altercation over a parking dispute at their rented accommodation with their landlord. The landlord along with unidentified individuals assaulted the lawyers using a kitchen knife. An FIR was subsequently registered. However, the landlord's wife filed a complaint against the lawyers under Section 354 of IPC.
Despite the severity of the assault, charges were filed only under Sections 323 and 308 of the IPC against the landlord and other unknown persons. The lawyer contended that this case warranted further investigation.
A Single Bench of Justice Bibek Chaudhuri observed, “This Court…clarifies that every citizen has a right to lodge complaint against the wrong doer, but it is expected from the Police authority that the Police shall take action against the wrong doer on ascertainment of fact as to whether such incident actually took place or not.”
Advocate Ravi Raj represented the petitioner, while AAG P.K. Verma appeared for the respondent.
“Senior Superintendent of Police…is requested to render all possible help to the petitioner, the injured and other Advocate inhabitants of the said house, so that they can at least stay without fear of being implicated in some heinous offences involving offences against women,” the Court noted.
The Court stated that the very registration of an FIR presumably suggested that the police authorities took the side of the landlord of the “unfortunate junior Advocates.” Therefore, the Court released the Police Officer attached to the investigation of the cases filed both by the petitioner and the wife of the landlord.
“The legal profession as well as the duties discharged by the learned Advocates are the onerous duty of helping the third pillar of democracy in dispensation of justice,” the Court remarked.
The Court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police to form a Special Investigating Team (S.I.T.) with two other Officers in the light of the FIR submitted by the petitioner as to whether the offences punishable under Sections 148, 149, 324, 326 and 307 of the I.P.C. were to be added or not.
Cause Title: Abhishek Kumar Srivastava v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Ravi Raj
Respondent: AAG P.K. Verma and AC Saroj Kumar Sharma
