Igatpuri striptease party bust: Why did the cops skip steps to avoid tests?

Representational Pic

When the Igatpuri police busted the striptease party at a local bungalow on March 26 and arrested 13 people, little did they know that it would involve them having to later go back and defend their actions - or in this case, inaction - after it emerged that the arrested were related to bureaucrats and top police officials.

Tests bypassed
Now, it appears that despite media reports wherein the officials had claimed that since they had found five bottles of liquor at the spot, the accused had been subjected to blood and urine tests the night of the arrest to rule out usage of narcotics drugs and alcohol, mid-day investigation reveals that it was bypassed altogether and instead, they were only made to undergo pre-custodial medical check-up.

The on-duty medical officer, Dr Lakshman Chavan told mid-day, "Usually, in instances of raids at parties, the police insist on taking samples to check for intoxicated substances. However, in this case, they only asked for a routine pre-arrest checkup. I have not collected urine or blood samples for any of them."

Pressure on medical officer
According to a senior doctor at the rural hospital, Chavan carried out the request and issued the medical certificates, only to be contacted by an officer from the Igatpuri police the next day, "requesting him to add a note - 'smelling of alcohol' - in the already issued certificate, but he refused to oblige."

Confirming the incident, Medical superintendent at the rural hospital, Dr Jafar Tadvi, said, "The concerned medical officer brought the matter to my notice and I advised him to follow the medical ethics, refraining from making any note under undue pressure."

Police responds
Interestingly, when mid-day contacted senior police inspector Sanjay Shukla on whether the arrested accused were tested for drugs and alcohol, he first clarified that they were tested only for alcohol, and when prodded further, added that the spot checking was conducted using a breathalyzer.

However, in direct contradiction was investigating police officer, assistant police inspector Mahesh Mandve of Igatpuri police station who disputed both Dr Chavan and Shukla and stated that the blood samples of the accused were collected.

But when asked where and who took the samples, Mandve first hesitated and then disconnected the call abruptly. Attempts to reach him thereafter did not yield any result.

What does it all mean?
Noted criminal lawyer Dinesh Tiwari explains, "It's evident that the police was working under pressure and must have deliberately not asked the medical officer to collect urine and blood samples of the arrested accused. So instead of registering the offence under non-bailable sections of IPC and NDPS Act, considering drugs and alcohol were apparently involved, they have made the case instead for a bailable offence."

Interestingly, the accused were arrested under IPC section 294 (obscene acts or words in public) and were released after paying a fine of Rs 5,000 each.