The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to the Special Police Establishment to conclude the investigation in a 2022 Crime Case registered at Police Station Special Police Establishment, Bhopal.
The petitioner further seeks a direction to the state government to provide a copy of the subject FIR.
The counsel for petitioner submits that though respondent No.2 (Private Respondent) was entrapped and was caught red-handed accepting a bribe, the investigation in the subject case has not yet been concluded.
He submits that respondent No.2 has even approached the Court by way of a petition seeking benefit of time scale of pay, as no charge-sheet has been filed till-date.
Insofar as the conduct of respondent No.2 is concerned, a criminal case has already been registered against him and the Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf was informed that investigation was underway. Further, with regard to the aspect of time scale of pay, the petition itself discloses that respondent No.2 has already approached the Court by way of a petition seeking time scale of pay and the matter is sub judice.
Though petitioner claims to have no personal interest, the Court is of the view that he does seem to have some interest in the matter, which is not being apparently disclosed.
The counsel for petitioner candidly admits that petitioner has not filed any other Public Interest Litigation on similar issues against other officers. He contends that such a petition has not been filed, since this is a unique case.
The Court is of the view that the subject case is not a unique case. It is a case of an officer who is alleged to have demanded bribe and was caught red handed. For the said action, FIR has already been registered, which is under investigation by the Investigating Agency. With regard to time scale of pay, respondent No.2 has already filed a petition, which is sub judice before the Court.
Hence, the Bench is of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, no direction is called for by the Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India particularly by way of a Public Interest Litigation.
Other grievance of the petitioner is that a copy of the FIR has not been made available to him under the Right to Information Act. In case, there is a wrongful denial of an information sought, the remedy of the petitioner would be under the Right to Information Act and not to file a Public Interest Litigation before the Court.
With regard to non-compliance of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Youth Bar Association of India vs. Union of India and another, (2016) 9 SCC 473, which mandates that copies of all FIRs should be uploaded on the Police website and if there is no such website, on the official website of the State Government, the concerned Authority is directed by the High Court to comply with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Youth Bar Association of India (supra), if not already done.