9w2861-09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2861 OF 2009 Shri Abhaychandra Ramdarsh Yadav. .. Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others. .. Respondents. .... Mr.R.D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.D. Shinde, A.P.P. for the State - Respondent Nos.1, 4 & 5. Mr.S.V. Marwadi, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 & 3. .... CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 03rd MAY, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Marwadi learned Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3 and learned A.P.P. for respondent Nos.1, 4 & 5. 2. The petitioner in this writ petition has made a serious grievance about his illegal detention by Matunga police station between 8:00 pm on 12.8.2009 and 4:30 pm on 13.8.2009 though 9w2861-09 2 he had absolutely no connection with the crime in question. He has made specific allegations against the respondent-officers in the writ petition and more particularly in paragraph Nos.6 to 10 thereof. Respondent Nos.2 & 3 against whom the allegations are made in the writ petition have filed reply affidavits denying all the allegations. We have perused the writ petition and its annexures so also the reply affidavits and the annexures thereto. From the contents of the affidavits, it is clear that the petitioner was in the police station from 8:00 pm onwards on 12.8.2009 till 4:30 pm on 13.8.2009. Whether he was illegally detained is the question raised in the writ petition. In the writ petition, he seeks enquiry in respect of the alleged illegal detention by some senior police officer. 3. It appears that, the Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Region has conducted an enquiry on the basis of the letter given by Yagnesh Bhatt when the petitioner was in detention. Having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations, so also the reply affidavits filed by respondent Nos.2 & 3, we deem it appropriate to direct the Additional Commissioner of Police, Sought Region, Mumbai to conduct an enquiry into the allegations made by the petitioner and 9w2861-09 3 find out whether respondent Nos.2 & 3, as alleged in the writ petition, detained the petitioner illegally at Matunga police station in connection with the crime in question. If he finds that respondent Nos.2 & 3 were responsible for the alleged illegal detention, he may proceed to take appropriate action in accordance with law against the erring officers. With these observations, we dispose of the petition. We direct the learned A.P.P. to forward copy of the writ petition with its annexures, so also the reply affidavits and its annexures to the Additional Commissioner of Polilce, South Region, Mumbai within a period of two weeks from today, along with a copy of this order. In the course of enquiry, it is open to the Additional Commissioner of Police, South Region, Mumbai to allow the parties to place on record additional material, if any, in support of their contentions. 4. We hope and trust that the Additional Commissioner of Police, South Region, Mumbai shall conclude the enquiry at the earliest. 5. In view of the aforesaid directions, Mr.Suryawanshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner does not press prayer clause (c) and seeks liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings for such prayer at an appropriate stage. 9w2861-09 4 6. While passing this order, we shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case, and the Additional Commissioner of Police shall conduct the enquiry uninfluenced by the observations made either in this order or in the earlier report dated 20.2.2010 of the Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Region, Mumbai. 7. Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. (A.R.JOSHI,J.) (D.B.BHOSALE,J.)