Bombay HC raps Thane police on influencer runover case probe

MUMBAI: Bombay high court recently directed the joint commissioner of police (crime), Thane, to personally reply to a petition by social media influencer Priya Singh who had alleged that the son of Anilkumar Gaikwad, vice-chairman and managing director of Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC), allegedly ran over her with an SUV on Ghodbunder Road, Thane in December.
“It shakes our conscience after perusing the case diary and record of investigation as the victim in crime has to plead repeatedly before the investigating officer for recording her statement,” said Justices Ajay Gadkari and Neela Gokhale in the June 14 order.
There were two petitions filed. Ashwajit Gaikwad sought quashing of December 11 FIR in which he was booked for rash driving and causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others. Singh urged to add sections, including attempt to murder and rape. On April 22 HC was told by the prosecutor that an attempt is being made to record Singh’s further statement.
On June 14, Singh’s advocate said since then she was not called for recording her statement and the advocate had phoned the IO on June 5 to record her statement. The prosecutor said IO Vishal Rumane of Kasarvadavali police station had called Singh on June 11 and requested her to remain present the next day.
The judges took note that the IO had “till date” not recorded her statement. They were “startled” after reading the June 4 case diary. It stated that as a report has to be sent to MotorAccident Claim Tribunal (MACT), Singh’s Aadhar card, bank pass book and other documents are necessary. “We are unable to accept such a recording in the case diary. According to us, investigation officer Vishal Rumane is investigating a crime and has not been appointed to file a claim for damages or compensation before MACT. “Prima facie, we find that the investigation officer is not well conversant with the provisions of CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code) which is the law of the land,” they added.
The judges, therefore, directed the JCP to file his “personal affidavit” in response to the petition. They “expect” him to read the entire petition, peruse all records of investigation, the case diary and thereafter only file the affidavit. They also directed him “not to delegate his powers to any subordinate officer.”
The judges also noted that IO Rumane had maintained the case diary in loose sheets. There was no consecutive pagination in the diary as usual in contravention of CrPC and directions issued from time to time by the DGP’s office. “There is much more to say about the investigation being carried out, however we reserve our comment to be offered after perusing the affidavit of joint commission of police, Thane, on that behalf,” they added. The judges directed the JCP’s affidavit to be filed by June 27 and posted the hearing on June 28.