Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Hiralal vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|27 February, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:
"[A] To transfer investigation to nay independent investigation agency that may deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case for Investigation into the death of Jasu Gagan Shial during police encounter, Aher Ranmal Ram during police remand in connection with FIR bearing II-CR No.85 of 1998 registered at Kutiyana Police Station, District Junagadh and Aher Narayan Jesti Bandhiya during police custody in connection with FIR bearing II-CR No.28 of 1995 and FIR bearing I-CR No.4 of 1996 and be further pleased to direct the such investigating agency to complete investigation within a stipulated period and preferably within six months;
[B] To direct such investigating agency to register fresh FIR/s and also investigate the complicity of concerned police officers and police personnel and their failure to complete the investigation and thereby discharge their obligation.
[C] during the pendency and/or final disposal of the present petition be pleased to direct respondent no.3 and 4 to place n record he stage of investigation and its outcome, if any, on affidavit in the form of action taken report pursuant to judgment and order dated 09.03.1998 passed in Special Civil Application NO.319 of 1997;
[D] to award the costs of the present petition."
2. Considering the subject matter and nature of prayers, it appears that this petition emanates from the order dated 09.03.1998 passed by the learned First Court in Special Civil Application No.319 of 1997, a writ petition filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation by an organization viz. Action Committee of Prevention of Police Atrocities. It further appears that by a subsequent order dated 03.09.1998 extension of time for completion of the investigation came to be granted.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a limited prayer in terms of para 9[A] is made by the petitioner. However, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and proper to place this matter before Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice for passing an appropriate order as to whether the matter be placed before the Court taking up Public Interest Litigations or this Court, in the context of the prayers made in this petition.
[Anant S. Dave, J.] *pvv Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Hiralal vs State

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
27 February, 2012