2005 INSC 1010
Anju Jain
v.
State of U.P. & Others
(Supreme Court Of India)
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 43 Of 2004 | 08-11-2005

1. This writ petition is filed by the mother of a boy named Sachin Jain. The
allegation in the writ petition is that Sachin Jain was kidnapped on 24.1.2004 in
a Maruti car at the instance of some criminals and in the writ petition the
petitioner has sought for a direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus to produce
the body of the petitioner's son Sachin Jain. We are told that the police has
already registered a case against five accused and charge-sheet has also been
submitted and the Court has taken cognizance of certain offences. So the prayer
for a writ of Habeas Corpus does not survive.

2. This Court appointed Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Senior Counsel to assist the Court
as it was suspected that some of the Police Inspectors/SHOs had filed some
false cases against Sachin Jain as he had filed a complaint before the National
Human Rights Commission on 6.1.2003. It is also brought to our notice that the
cases filed against Sachin Jain were false cases and on inquiry it was found that
no case had been made out and the Superintendent of Police was of the view
that these cases were not based on any complaint but the police had suo motu
registered the cases.

3. We issued notices to the Police Inspectors/SHOs Rakesh Pratap Singh, Har
Prasad Singh and Vijay Kumar, who had been working as Inspectors/SHOs at
Nai Mandi, Kotwali, Muzaffar Nagar during the relevant period. These
Inspectors/SHOs are represented through Counsel, and we heard Counsel who
denied the allegations made against these respondents.

4. It is to be ascertained that while registering a case against Sachin Jain the
Inspectors/SHOs had committed any laches, illegalities or irregularities and
whether he had been victimized and this incident led to ultimate crime allegedly
committed by the accused who had been charge-sheeted. Hence, we order for an

1                                                     SpotLaw
inquiry into the whole incident. The inquiry, we hope, would throw some light
whether these Inspectors/SHOs had any nexus with the alleged criminals and
this situation thereby led to the commission of the serious crimes.

5. The Inspector General of Police, Meerut Zone shall conduct a detailed
inquiry and find out the truth. The relevant records in the case shall be made
available to the Inspector General of Police and he may also collect other
relevant records and shall conduct an inquiry. The Inspectors/SHOs shall be
given reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter and after inquiry the
Inspector General of Police shall file a report addressed to the Registrar General
of this Court within a period of three months. Registry to take further action in
the matter.

6. Post the case after three months.

2  SpotLaw