The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a plea seeking an investigation against former Mumbai Police Commissioner Parambir Singh in connection with the infamous Antilia Bomb scare case as well as businessman Mansukh Hiren’s murder.
A division bench comprised of Justice Sunil Shukre and Kamal Khata a petition filed by one Parshuram Sharma seeking directions to the State Police to investigate into the alleged role played by Singh, in the Antilia Bomb scare case and also the murder case of Mansukh Hiren.
The bench noted that the material relied upon by the petitioner was mere “hearsay evidence.”
“The material do not disclose commission of any cognizable offence nor do it show that there is any reasonable probability of commission of cognizable offence at the hands of former Commissioner of Police. Unless and until such material is available on record and it is within the own knowledge of the person seeking registration of a crime, it cannot be said that any more investigation by police is warranted and that a person seeking such investigation in the crime has locus in the matter,” the order reads.
After considering the arguments, the bench noted that in an order passed on January 23, in the bail petition of one of the accused, Pradeep Sharma, a coordinate bench made some observations about the payment of 5 lakh to one Ishaan Sinha, a cyber expert.
The division bench, however, ruled that this was insufficient to warrant an investigation against Parambir Singh.
If the petitioner wishes to convert his suspicion into a reasonable probability of the former Commissioner of Police being involved in the current crime, Sharma must present additional evidence that converts his suspicion into a reasonable probability of the former top cop engaging in some or other criminal activity, the bench stated.
“It is only that informant who would have a locus to file FIR with police station, in terms of section 154 of CrPC, who has credible information about commission of cognizable offence. Criminal law can be set into motion only after the complaint made to police discloses commission of cognizable offence in terms of section 154 of CrPC. All these aspects necessary for initiation of investigation into a cognizable crime are absent in this case,” the bench noted.
With these observations, the bench dismissed the petition.
