I N THE judgement of the caseShahrukh Ziya Mohammad v. State of Maharashtra and others, delivered on August 30, 2024, Justice Vinay Joshi and Justice Vrushali V. Joshi, at the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, have concluded that the material produced on record is sufficient to form an opinion that the investigation was not carried assiduously in proper manner in Ritika Malu case at Nagpur involving death of two youngsters on the intervening night of February 24 and 25, 2024.

 

The accused Ritika was driving her car in excessive speed under influence of liquor. She gave a dash to a twowheeler from behind and caused death of two youngsters riding the two-wheeler. A crime came to be registered at the instance of kin of one of the deceased. The aspect of arrest of the lady accused is entangled in legal process till date. This petition was filed seeking direction for transferring the investigation to the State Crime Investigation Department (CID) for fair proper and impartial investigation of the FIR registered withTahsil Police Station, Nagpur, for the offences punishable under sections 304-A, 279, 337,338 of the IPC and section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Since beginning, the first informant and kin of the deceased are blaming the police for shielding the accused. It has been alleged that the investigation was purposely delayed to facilitate a safe passage to the accused in future trial. The Investigating Officer has left certain lacunae at the behest of influential accused. Despite seriousness, due to dilly-dally tactics adopted by the police, the family of the victim has lost faith in the investigating agency which caused them to make several representations. Since no cognisance was taken by the higher police authorities, as well as by the State, they have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for transfer of investigation. Accused Ritika along with co-passenger (Mrs Sarda) had been to CP Club, Nagpur, on February 24, 2024, late in the evening.

 

They had consumed alcohol and while on return journey the untoward incident occurred. The accused was driving her Mercedes Benz Car in rash and negligent manner and was heading towards Mayo Hospital square from Sadar Area. The deceased No. 2. Mohd. Ateque was pillion –rider on the said two-wheeler. Deceased No. 1, Mohd. Hussain, who was driving twowheeler died on the spot. The other deceased died in the Mayo Hospital, while he was under treatment. The accident occurred in late midnight around 1.30 am to 1.45 am. The police registered the report lodged by the informant cousin of the deceased No.1, Iftekhar Ahmad around 9.30 am on February 25, 2024. The issue for consideration before the High Court was limited to the extent whether the petitioner has made out a case for transfer of the investigation from Tehsil Police, Nagpur to the State CID. The HC has stated that it was conscious of the fact that the Investigating agency has complete freedom to do investigation in a particular manner, but it should be rationale and without biased approach. It is revealed from the police papers that the investigating agency has collected CCTV footage, bills from CP Club, mechanical examination of the vehicle (belated), spot verification report(belated).

 

However, it reveals that at the initial crucial period, the matter was handled improperly, but, on confronted with public outcry and media reports police swung into action. The reason assigned in affidavit-inreply for delay in registration of the report is that, there was disagreement between the relatives of the deceased as to in whose name the report is to be lodged. After discussion this disagreement was resolved, which according to the Police caused delay in registration of the report. The Police are well aware that anyone can set the criminal law into motion. Admittedly, respondent-4, PSI Bhaval reached the spot within few minutes from the occurrence. Several Passersby were present on the spot. Even the scene was videographed, and was made viral, lateron. Despite noting a cognisable offence, the Police did not register the report on their own, but, instead waited for the family members to come forward and resolve their disagreement on the name of the person, lodging the report. Though the petitioner has made much fuss about the approach of the investigating agency in not arresting the accused till date, the Court has said that it was not inclined to go into that aspect.

 

The reason is obvious that the tabular charts indicates that a legal process is going on at various levels and the Courts of competent jurisdiction have passed orders, therefore, to the HC’s mind the said cannot be a reason. However, the initial inaction on the part of the investigating agency of letting the accused to go from the spot, without taking initial steps to send themfor medical examination indicate substance in petitioner’s allegation. A communication addressed to thePolice Commissioner by Special Asst. Public Prosecutor Megha Burange, specifically contains complaint of nonco-operation by the respondent-I.O., even to his Advocate (Public Prosecutor). The HC has restrained itself from commenting on investigation papers indetail, to avoid causing serious prejudice to either side, as the investigationis still incomplete. The lapses alreadymentioned would reasonably create animpression that initial investigation waslacking in bona fides or can be said tobe tainted one. The criminal offence isalways against the society at large, casting an onerous duty on the State, to faithfully discharge its sacrosanct responsibility in carrying a fair investigation. Onthe premise that the manner of investigation is prerogative of the agency, still, the Courts cannot turn blind eyeto the factual aspect by adhering to suchgeneral proposition. Against the backdrop of the material on record, the HC has pointed out that the circumstances in the case havepersuaded the Court to exercise inherent powers to bring the credibility andconfidence in the investigating agencyfor reaching to the truth ultimately andto guard the fundamental rights of a citizen. In as much as the transfer of investigation from local police to some other State agency, could cause no prejudice to the State in any manner.

 

One of the reasons for transfer is todo justice between the parties and toinstill confidence in the society. In conclusion, the HC was not satisfied about the mode and manner in which theinvestigating agency had worked, andtherefore, as an exceptional situation, the HC has stated that it is inclined totransfer the investigation to State agencywith a hope and trust for impartial, fairand truthful investigation. The HC has allowed the criminal writpetition with direction that the investigation in Crime No. 122/2024 registeredwith Tahsil Police Station, Nagpur, shall be forthwith entrusted to the State CIDto carry out further investigation thoroughly, properly and expeditiously totake it to the logical end. A senior officer of the State CID, not below the rankof ACP or SP shall take weekly review of the progress of the investigation