Team Herald
PANJIM: “It pains to see the manner in which the police machinery in the State functions,” the court said while passing landmark orders in the Kashinath Shetye LAQ theft case and severely criticising the police department for its functioning.
The Judicial Magistrate First Class First Class Vijaylaxmi R Shivolkar, while ordering cases to be filed against PI Vishwesh Karpe for registering false cases against Shetye, said, that posting the LAQ on Facebook page itself does not constitute an offence of theft.
“It pains to see the manner in which the police machinery in the State functions. This is the classic example which shows how blindly the order of the political leaders and of higher officers of the department are blindly followed by the subordinate officers so as to cause hardship to the common man who are at the mercy to the so-called officers and political leaders,” the order says.
The Court further pointed out that Shetye is a junior engineer by profession and so also a social activist.
“Being so a man like him is targeted in the manner discussed herein above by the police officers in charge of the police stations at the behest of the superior officer and persons who are in power then one can imagine the situation of common man, to what extent a police officer can go to falsely implicate any person in an offence virtually not committed by him if the so-called police machinery and persons in power intent to target a person for whatever cause and reasons,” the order reads.
The court observed that PI Karpe was under an obligation to hold a preliminary inquiry in the matter, but he has on the face of record, in utter dereliction of his duty, acted in an unfair manner and blindly followed the order of his superior.
“Not only that he has misread the section of Sections of IPC and in his own wisdom lodged the complaint of theft against the complainant when there was no lawful ground for him to file such proceedings or charge against the complainant,” it observed.
“The complaint (Shetye) therefore prima facie shows that the prospective accused (PI Karpe) has committed an offence punishable under Section 211 of IPC. Undoubtedly, the above act of prospective accused PI Karpe has damaged the image and reputation of the complainant. Therefore the complainant has prima facie made out the case under Section 499 and 500 of IPC against accused PI Karpe,” the order adds.
Further the order says, “The proceedings are dropped as against accused Nilesh Cabral, Dharmendra Sharma and Dr Pramod Sawant and issue process against accused no 4 PI Karpe for committing offence punishable under Sections 211, 499 and 500 of IPC”.
Strictures against PI Karpe
The court felt that Karpe undisputedly has caused great damage to the reputation of the complainant.
“PI Karpe acting as a puppet at the hands of his higher officer blindly proceeded to lodge an FIR against the complainant for an alleged offence of committing theft by the complainant in the assembly house without verifying the contents of the complaint and without verifying into the fact whether the said complaint actually required an action to be taken under the Indian Penal Code so also without even understanding the requirement fulfilling the ingredients of theft,” it said.
Not only that, the court said, Karpe without any locus standi assumed within himself the authority of acting as the complainant in the said case which act of his is highly objectionable and is required to viewed seriously.
“PI Karpe is the Station Officer having power to maintain law and order within his jurisdiction. However, has acted as a complainant and went ahead to lodge the complaint of theft against the complainant. It is a matter of serious concern that the officer in the rank of in charge of a police station does not know the basic ingredients of the definition of ‘theft’.”
“The PI without even recording the statement of Cabral the first informant and the complainant, the aggrieved person, went ahead to register a FIR of theft in the House under Section 380 of IPC, against the complainant,” the order states.
No theft or Breach
The said LAQ pertains to the information of the complainant himself and since it was an open document forwarded to the department of the complainant where he was working and since it had changed several hands, it therefore cannot be said to be moveable property being intentionally and dishonestly being taken from any person, including Nilesh Cabral being the informant and aggrieved person, the court observed.
“Even going one step ahead presuming for a moment that it is a complainant who posted those question on the Facebook as alleged in the complaint dated 13/07/2017 addressed to the Speaker by Cabral, however said act of posting the LAQ on Facebook page itself does not constitute an offence of theft neither it was the case of the complainant that the complainant had committed theft, nor the SP North Mr Kartik Kashyap ordered the PI to lodge the FIR of theft by the complainant.”
“It is Mr Karpe’s strange understanding of definition of theft which constituted the said act into a theft and accordingly he without any authority stepped into the shoes of the complainant and became the complainant himself as well, also registered the FIR against the present complainant, which acts of his arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, objectionable and totally contrary to the law,” court said.
The court further said that PI Karpe has failed in his duty and obligation and without application of mind to the factual situation and also in order to please his higher officer, caused loss, damage to the image and to the reputation of the complainant.
