A sessions court in Mumbai has directed a magistrate to issue summonses to former Maharashtra director general of police Satish Mathur and other senior officers for not registering an FIR against MHADA officials in a complaint of alleged fraud.
As reported by the news agency PTI, after issuing a summons, the magistrate has been directed to proceed further against the officers by recording evidence of the complainant and witnesses.
Earlier in March, Additional Sessions Judge Mujibodeen Shaikh had overturned a magistrate court order that dismissed a complaint against former top brass of the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), including its then head Mathur.
Judge Shaikh, while passing the order, also pulled up the officers for keeping the complaint pending for over two years under the “garb of inquiry” while waiting for opinions from the very government departments they were meant to investigate, as per PTI.
The court found that the act of the officers came under “the omission to consider the prevailing laws and another facet of negligence or dereliction of duty”.
Court finds MHADA officials in collusion with developers caused wrongful loss to the government
When there was ample evidence that MHADA officials, in collusion with the developers, caused wrongful loss to the government, then it was the duty of respondents to register the FIR immediately, the court said.
The judge, while passing the order, said, “Now the time has also come to make it clear that no one is above the law, and the law does not protect the white-collar persons who are using their office/designation to protect the officers deeply involved in wrongful gain for them and wrongful loss for the state,” as cited by PTI.
Judge Shaikh further said that the order passed by the magistrate was “skin-saving and erroneous” and needs to be quashed and set aside, as per PTI.
The matter pertains to a complaint filed by activist Kamlakar Shenoy in 2017 alleging a fraud involving the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) and private developers.
As per Shenoy`s complaint, private developers had failed to surrender a surplus area measuring over 1,37,000 square metres to the state, causing wrongful gain of approximately Rs 14,000 crore to the developers and a corresponding loss to the public exchequer.
Shenoy claimed MHADA and police officials “wilfully and deliberately” failed to register a First Information Report (FIR) despite evidence of a cognisable offence.
Citing a Supreme Court order, the court ruled that if a complaint discloses a cognisable offence, police have no option but to register an FIR immediately.
“In the case in hand, the respondents (officers) have shown disregard for the mandate of law laid down in the above case law,” it held.
The court underlined that anti-corruption laws have been enacted, but effective and efficient implementation is lacking on account of the fact that corrupt activities are widespread in public administration.
The court then further directed the magistrate to restore the complaint and issue process against the officials under Sections 166A (public servant disobeying direction under law), 217 (shielding an accused), 218 (creating fake or incorrect report) and 34 (common intention).
(With inputs from PTI)
