On June 16, 2026, Justice Jitendra Kumar of Patna High Court delivered a 5-page long judgement in the case of Manish Kumar vs. The State of Bihar through Director General of Police, Bihar and six others, wherein, he directed the Station House Officer, Murar Buxar to lodge FIR against Kamal Nayan Pandey, the then Station House Officer, Murar, Buxar and directed the Director General of Police, Bihar to take compliance report from the Station House Officer, Murar, Buxar, Ara regarding lodging of the FIR and entrust the investigation to the Crime Investigation Department because the case was lodged against a police officer. Justice Kumar concluded: “11. In case, the Petitioner is not satisfied by the investigation of the C.I.D. also, then he would be at liberty to file a further writ petition before this Court seeking appointment of C.B.I. to investigate into the matter, because this matter relates to protection of the fundamental right of the people and brutality committed by the police officer. If such conduct is not controlled and checked, the whole rule of law and constitutional protection of life and liberty of the citizen of the country would go to wind and the national police may become like one of Nazi Germany…..13. The D.G.P., Bihar is also directed to send a compliance report to the Registrar General of this Court to be put up on record within thirty days.” It is not clear as to whether High Court’s Registrar General has received the compliance report from the D.G.P., Bihar and whether the same has been up on record within thirty days from the date of the judgement dated June 16.
In this case, the petitioner had approached the Court seeking a direction for lodging of FIR against the Station House Officer (SHO), Murar, Buxar, pleading that despite the written report given by the petitioner to the Officer In-Charge, of the Police Station, and the Superintendent of Police, as well as the District Magistrate, FIR has not been lodged by the police station. The petitioner alleged that he was brutally assaulted by the SHO and both his legs were broken by him. As per the written report submitted by the Petitioner to the concerned police officer, the Petitioner had gone to the stall of his friend situated in the village Chaugaya on July 4, 2024 for online uploading of title documents in regard to his land. At 2 PM., when the petitioner was going to answer the call of nature, the SHO and other constables came on a vehicle of Murar police station came. The SHO called him and enquired about him and when he came to know that he belongs to a particular caste, he abused him and assaulted him with his danda because of which both his legs were broken. In its counter affidavit, SP , Buxar claimed that the police had not beaten the petitioner. His leg was broken he had slipped on account of rainy weather, which resulted into breaking of his legs. Justice Kumar examined the the X-Ray Report was not persuaded by this explanation of the police. He refused to believe that a poor man who does not gather courage to lodge FIR even against his co-citizen can dare to lodge false report against a police officer.
Justice Kumar observed: “….as per the allegation, prima facie case of cognizable offence is clearly made out against Kamal Nayan Pandey, who was the then Officer in-Charge of Murar Police Station, Buxar, Ara. The Court noted that s per the allegation, prima facie cognizable offence is made out, warranting registration of FIR against the SHO. The Court observed that “for prosecution of the accused, who happened to be a police officer, does not require even sanction under Section 197 Cr.PC/ 218 B.N.S.S. because such brutal act on the part of the police officer against a poor man is not a part of his official duty. 7. It is shocking and disturbing that the cry of the victim for lodging of FIR before the concerned police officers, including the Superintendent of Police and the District
Magistrate, went unheard by the officers despite their duty to do the needful to prosecute the accused, even if the accused happened to be an officer. It is trite to say that ours is a constitutional democracy based on rule of law. Howsoever high one may be, the law is above all. There is also equality before law and equal protection of law of everybody, howsoever poor he may be.”
He added: “8. At this stage, referring the Petitioner to the Judicial Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.PC/175(3) B.N.S.S. would be further injustice to the Petitioner. Moreover, as per the allegation, there is clear violation of fundamental right of the Petitioner as granted and guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution requiring immediate lodging of FIR, failing which, the people of the Country would lose faith not only in police but even in the Writ Court.”
No comments:
Post a Comment