- (1.)THIS petition has been filed seeking direction against the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 for holding inquiry against respondent No. 4, who was at the relevant time Incharge of Newasa Police Station and for payment of compensation for the illegal detention of the petitioner between 5-5-1992 to 7-5-1992 and also for taking appropriate action against the respondent No. 4 and respondent No. 5 Executive Magistrate, Newasa, for depriving the petitioner of his personal liberty by abusing the legal process.
(2.)CERTAIN undisputed facts leading to the filing of the present petition are as follows. One Uttam Jaywant Chavan was a witness in criminal case filed against the petitioner by Dhawale at C. R. No. 86 of 1988 for offence under sections 324, 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The date of the said complaint was 15-5-1988. Criminal case was already pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Newasa. The complaint was lodged by the witness Uttam Chavan that threats were held out to him and, therefore, the petitioner came to be arrested on 5-5-1990 and kept in police custody and chapter proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under section 110 of Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner though arrested on 5-5-1990, he was produced before the Executive Magistrate only on 7-5-1990, on which date he was released on furnishing bond of Rs. One Thousand.
(3.)ON behalf of the petitioner, it is contended firstly that there was no case made out for initiation of proceedings under section 110 of Criminal Procedure Code against the petitioner. Secondly, it is contended that the petitioner ought to have been produced before the Magistrate and obtained orders for his detention in custody. Thirdly, it is contended that in any event the petitioner ought to have been produced within 24 hours before the Executive Magistrate i. e. on the following morning of 6th May, 1990. It is alleged that the petitioner was, deliberately detained in custody without orders and kept under detention for a period of 2 days without production before the Magistrate at the instance of the complainant Uttam Chavan who was a witness in the earlier proceedings pending against the petitioner. It was pointed out on behalf of the petitioner that similar proceedings were initiated by the said Police Station against the petitioner in the year 1988 under section 107 of Criminal Procedure Code on the complaint of the very witness Uttam Chavan. The said proceedings bear Chapter Case No. 102 of 1988. The crux of the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that, it is the respondent No. 4 P. S. I. Pawar who was at the relevant time Incharge of the Newasa Police Station, who is responsible for the illegal detention of the petitioner.