Bombay HC Slams Maharashtra Police Over 'Casual' Case Diary Handling, Seeks DGP’s Affidavit On Law Compliance

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court came down heavily on the Maharashtra police, questioning whether legal provisions and official circulars issued by the Director General of Police (DGP) were meant to be followed or merely left to gather dust in law books.

A bench of Justices Ajey Gadkari and Rajesh Patil, while hearing a petition concerning a sluggish investigation into an economic offence, expressed serious concern over the manner in which the police were maintaining the case diary.

Referring to the case diary as “a loose leaf in a yellow colour plastic file”, the judges remarked that it had been maintained in an “absolute casual manner.” They termed the conduct of the investigating officers as “unconscionable and unpardonable,” especially in light of repeated DGP circulars mandating compliance with Section 172 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

“These directions issued by the DGP are clearly not percolating down to the lower rank of police personnel, who are blatantly violating the instructions issued by the topmost authority of the Police Department,” the bench observed.

The court said it was appalled that such indiscipline prevailed in what is supposed to be a disciplined force. “It appears to us that, in a disciplined police force, the police personnel themselves are not following the discipline,” the judges noted. “Undoubtedly, all police personnel must follow the mandate of law as well as the directives issued by the DGP.”

Taking a stern view of the continued lapses, the court directed the DGP to file an affidavit explaining why the circulars were not being followed by subordinate officers. “We direct the Director General of Police to explain on oath whether the provisions of law enacted by the Parliament of India are binding and mandatory on the police personnel in the State of Maharashtra or are to be retained only in the books of law,” the bench stated.

The court also took note of the serious investigative gaps in the present case, observing that though the FIR was registered in June 2024, even the basic step of conducting a panchnama had not been completed.

The bench further directed the Commissioner of Police, Thane, to file a separate affidavit and posted the matter for further hearing on July 21.

The HC was hearing a petition filed by Directors of firm Euronet Piyush Sharma, Himanshu Pujara and Mathew Robertson; Euronet’s legal counsel Shreya Suresh; and director of National Realty Private Limited Sorabh Jain seeking quashing of an FIR filed against them at Vartak Nagar police station in Thane. The complaint was lodged by Pyramid Consulting Engineers Private Limited alleging cheating.