The Supreme Court has made strict remarks while canceling the anticipatory bail of three policemen. The court has canceled this bail in the case of recovering money from the jeweler. The Supreme Court said that when law enforcers become extortionists, citizens are left in a dilemma because they start seeking protection against those whom it is their duty to protect. All three policemen are accused of extorting money from a jeweler. To confront the police in such a situation is to invite immediate retaliation. The citizen’s only option is to quietly surrender to uniformed officers, even in the face of obvious abuse.
Actually, a father and his minor daughter were traveling from Mumbai with his brother-in-law. The police took him into custody at the railway station. During the search of his bag, 14 grams of gold bars and Rs 31,900 in cash were recovered. They were then taken to a nearby room and forced to exchange cash for the gold bars. The father lodged a First Information Report after the incident, after which the Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail of the officers.
However, the Bombay High Court accepted his petition after seeing the CCTV footage obtained during the investigation. According to the High Court, the accused were wearing identity cards and there were no signs of any problem between the father and the daughter, and there was also a delay in registering the FIR.
Where there was no camera, policemen took it
The Maharashtra government challenged this through a special leave petition in the Supreme Court. During the hearing, advocate Bharat Bagla, appearing for the state, said that as per various guidelines, the process of search and seizure is done with proper video recording. However, the policemen took the father and his daughter to a room where there were no cameras. He said the state does not tolerate such excesses committed by uniformed officers against civilians and informed the court that after a proper investigation, the three officers have been dismissed from service.
Accepting the petition of the state government, the Supreme Court said that we are surprised that the High Court has commented that he does not have any symptoms of any kind of problem, especially when his facial expressions are not clear in the footage. We also noticed that both adults were moving forward, one of them making continuous gestures with his hands while the child followed behind, which is definitely a sign of trouble. We also find that the time spent in the closed room was sufficient for the policemen to commit the actions mentioned in the complaint, which we submit would have to be proved in the criminal trial in any case.
The senior Supreme Court lawyer also rejected the argument that the return of the gold bars by the accused police officers refutes the charge of extortion and said that the return of the gold bars only strengthens the prosecution’s case.
Leave a Reply