Criminal Appeal Against Police Officer: Supreme Court’s Ruling on Investigation Lapses

The case of Shri Hanumant Dinkar Arjun vs. Shri Suresh R. Andhare & Anr. deals with a criminal appeal challenging the rejection of a complaint against a police officer. The appellant had filed a complaint under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Bombay Police Act, alleging misconduct by a police officer in a murder investigation. The Supreme Court was called upon to determine whether the complaint could be entertained while a related criminal appeal was pending in the High Court.

The judgment clarifies the principles governing complaints against investigating officers and the necessity of waiting for the final outcome of related judicial proceedings before pursuing independent criminal action.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Shri Hanumant Dinkar Arjun, filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indapur, invoking Sections 166, 167, 201 to 204 of the IPC, along with Section 25 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. The complaint was based on certain adverse remarks made by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, in his order dated February 26, 2003, in a murder case where four accused persons were convicted under Section 302/34 IPC.

The appellant argued that the observations made by the Sessions Court justified criminal proceedings against the investigating officer, Shri Suresh R. Andhare, for his alleged misconduct in handling the investigation.

Arguments by the Petitioner (Shri Hanumant Dinkar Arjun)

• The trial court’s judgment contained adverse remarks against the police officer, demonstrating a prima facie case for criminal action.
• The investigating officer had allegedly manipulated evidence and failed in his duty, warranting prosecution under relevant penal provisions.
• The High Court erred in rejecting the criminal complaint despite clear findings in the Sessions Court’s judgment.

Arguments by the Respondent (Shri Suresh R. Andhare & Anr.)

• The criminal appeal against the murder conviction was still pending before the High Court.
• Any independent criminal action against the investigating officer should be deferred until the conclusion of the pending appeal.
• The High Court correctly dismissed the criminal revision application since the observations of the Sessions Court were not conclusive findings against the police officer.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court noted that the basis of the complaint was the order dated February 26, 2003, which was itself under judicial scrutiny in a pending criminal appeal. The Court observed:

“When the order, which is the foundation for filing the complaint in question, is sub judice in the criminal appeal, the appellant is required to await the final outcome of the criminal appeal filed by the accused persons.”

The Court emphasized that premature proceedings could lead to conflicting findings and disrupt the judicial process.

Final Verdict

The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal, granting liberty to the appellant to move afresh based on the outcome of the pending criminal appeal. It clarified that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Implications of the Judgment

This ruling establishes that complaints against investigating officers should not be entertained while related criminal appeals are pending. It upholds the principle that courts must avoid conflicting rulings and ensure judicial consistency.

Petitioner Name: Shri Hanumant Dinkar Arjun.
Respondent Name: Shri Suresh R. Andhare & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari.
Place Of Incident: Maharashtra.
Judgment Date: 03-05-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Shri Hanumant Dinkar vs Shri Suresh R. Andha Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 03-05-2019.pdf