T. Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Telangana
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No. 26755 OF 2017 O R D E R:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the 3rd respondent Station House Officer based on the false complaints lodged by the 4th respondent against the petitioner, without conducting any preliminary investigation and without issuing notice under Section 41(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as illegal and arbitrary.
The case of the petitioner is that some differences arose between himself and his wife i.e. the 4th respondent. In that connection, on 04.07.2017, the 4th respondent and her brother who is working as a Police Constable at Malkajgiri Police Station, quarrelled with the petitioner, abused him in filthy language and manhandled him. The 4th respondent on 10.07.2017 gave a complaint against the petitioner and his mother, but the 3rd respondent without registering any crime and without conducting preliminary enquiry, sending the police personnel to the house of the petitioner during nights and harassing him. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Learned Government Pleader for Home, based on the written instructions obtained from the Sub-Inspector of Police, SR Nagar Police Station, Hyderabad, submits that on 16.07.2017, the 4th respondent lodged a complaint with the 3rd respondent stating that the petitioner has been harassing her mentally and physically and requested to counsel the petitioner and take necessary action against him. To know the veracity of the contents of the complaint,
the 3rd respondent police personnel tried to contact the petitioner, who, instead of cooperating with the police, approached this Court by way of this Writ Petition, submits the learned Government Pleader. As of now, according to the learned Government Pleader, no crime has been registered against the petitioner and if any action warrants against him, due procedure as contemplated in law will be followed.
The Supreme Court in Rajesh Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017), while considering the question 'whether any directions are called for to prevent the misuse of Section 498A, as acknowledged in certain studies and decisions', has issued certain guidelines, which read as under:
"
i) (a) In every district one or more Family Welfare Committees be constituted by the District Legal Services Authorities preferably comprising of three members. The constitution and working of such committees may be reviewed from time to time and at least once in a year by the District and Sessions Judge of the district who is also the Chairman of the District Legal Services Authority.
(b) The Committees may be constituted out of para legal volunteers/social workers/retired persons/wives of working officers/other citizens who may be found suitable and willing. (c) The Committee members will not be called as witnesses. (d) Every complaint Under Section 498A received by the police or the Magistrate be referred to and looked into by such committee. Such committee may have interaction with the parties personally or by means of telephone or any other mode of communication including electronic communication. (e) Report of such committee be given to the Authority by whom the complaint is referred to it latest within one month from the date of receipt of complaint.
(f) The committee may give its brief report about the factual aspects and its opinion in the matter.
(g) Till report of the committee is received, no arrest should normally be effected.
(h) The report may be then considered by the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate on its own merit.
(i) Members of the committee may be given such basic minimum training as may be considered necessary by the Legal Services Authority from time to time.
(j) The Members of the committee may be given such honorarium as may be considered viable.
(k) It will be open to the District and Sessions Judge to utilize the cost fund wherever considered necessary and proper. ii) Complaints Under Section 498A and other connected offences may be investigated only by a designated Investigating Officer of the area. Such designations may be made within one month from today. Such designated officer may be required to undergo training for such duration (not less than one week) as may be considered appropriate. The training may be completed within four months from today;
iii) In cases where a settlement is reached, it will be open to the District and Sessions Judge or any other senior Judicial Officer nominated by him in the district to dispose of the proceedings including closing of the criminal case if dispute primarily relates to matrimonial discord;
iv) If a bail application is fled with at least one clear day's notice to the Public Prosecutor/complainant, the same may be decided as far as possible on the same day. Recovery of disputed dowry items may not by itself be a ground for denial of bail if maintenance or other rights of wife/minor children can otherwise be protected. Needless to say that in dealing with bail matters, individual roles, prima facie truth of the allegations, requirement of further arrest/custody and interest of justice must be carefully weighed;
v) In respect of persons ordinarily residing out of India impounding of passports or issuance of Red Corner Notice should not be a routine;
vi) It will be open to the District Judge or a designated senior judicial officer nominated by the District Judge to club all connected cases between the parties arising out of matrimonial disputes so that a holistic view is taken by the Court to whom all such cases are entrusted; and vii) Personal appearance of all family members and particularly outstation members may not be required and the trial court ought to grant exemption from personal appearance or
permit appearance by video conferencing without adversely affecting progress of the trial.
viii) These directions will not apply to the offences involving tangible physical injuries or death.
In the light of the judgment rendered in Rajesh Sharma's case, the Investigating Officer shall strictly adhere to the guidelines and if it comes to light that the 3rd respondent, in the name of investigation, causes any harassment to the petitioner, he shall be liable to be prosecuted in his eo nominee capacity. Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, the miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed.
____________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 11th August 2017 Issue CC in a week.
ksld