Maharashtra: Wrongly cuffed police officer gets Rs 2 lakh from court

The Bombay High Court has held as illegal the arrest of a policeman a recipient of the Presidents medal for a faulty probe in a murder case and directed the Maharashtra government to pay him Rs 2 lakh as compensationThe police officer Sambhaji Patil petitioned the high court seeking an inquiry against the additional superintendent of police Satara who had arrested him He also sought compensation of Rs 10 lakhPatil was arrested in March 2013 on the charges of destruction of evidence and intentional preparation of a faulty report in a murder case he had probed in 2009 He was granted bail a day after his arrestA division bench of JusticesA S Chandurkar and Rajesh Patil on Monday said the power of arrest has not been cautiously exercised and that the police officer was arrested in an illegal manner It further noted that this was not an exceptional case where the petitioners arrest was imperative and the offences were bailableldquoA case has been made out by the petitioner for seeking compensation in public law on account of his illegal arrest that has resulted in violation of his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of Indiardquo the bench said It pointed out that the petitioner policeman received the Presidents Police Medal in January 2004 for his meritorious service and the Director General of Police insignia the same year for rendering excellent serviceThe court said the petitioner was entitled to receive Rs 2 lakh compensation from the state government It directed the government to pay the sum within eight weeks and said it would be open for the government to recover the money from the officer found guilty of dereliction of dutyPatil served as the officer in charge of Karad city police station in Satara district in 2009 when he probed a murder case After his transfer the case was probed by another officer In 2012 the petitioner was called upon by the additional superintendent of police Satara to explain the manner of investigation undertaken by him in the caseIn March 2013 the petitioner appeared before the additional superintendent of police and was informed that he was being arrested on the charges of destruction of evidence and intentional preparation of a false report He was released on bail the next day when he was produced for remand before a magistrates courtThe petitioner claimed he was illegally detained for a day and was not informed of the grounds of his arrest He also claimed he was implicated in the case The bench in its order noted that as per provisions of law once the petitioner was arrested he ought to have been produced before the superintendent of police who was the superior officerThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever