 and place all such material before him.){kind=link}
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to the respondents to conduct a fair and impartial enquiry into the incident that is said to have occurred on September 21 and 22, 2021.
It is the plea of petitioner Rajesh Rajak that some antisocial persons destroyed the Parmar Vansh Kalin Kershardev Temple at Mandi Bamora, Tehsil Bina District Sagar. It is his further case that even though an FIR has been lodged and the police are investigating the case, the same is improper. Therefore, an adequate inquiry requires to be made.
Swapnil Ganguly, Deputy Advocate General, submitted that since criminal law has been set in motion, the police are conducting the matter in just and appropriate manner. It is only apprehension of the petitioner that the enquiry is not appropriate. Hence, he pleaded that the petition be dismissed.
Also read: Mukul Roy disqualification: Suvendu Adhikari moves Supreme Court against West Bengal Speaker’s order
On hearing the counsels, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Jain was of the view that the apprehension of the petitioner may not be justified. Except his claim and his belief that the investigation is not being done properly, there is no other material to substantiate his submission.
The bench held that if at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the prosecution is not conducting a proper enquiry, he is always at liberty to approach the concerned Investigation Officers (IO) and place all such material before him.
Further the plea of the petitioner is that various acts have been committed by various persons and no action is being taken.
Therefore the Court observed that the petitioner is entitled to place all these materials before the I.O. It is needless to state that the I.O. should necessarily take into account all materials placed by the petitioner and others and thereafter to continue appropriate investigation that has to be done. The Investigation Officer is also entitled to modify the charges or to add the other charges as well as other accused as he may deem fit based on the investigation.
Also read: PIL in Supreme Court seeks to hold political parties accountable for their manifestos
Since criminal law has been set in motion, the High Court does not think it appropriate to interfere. The course of law having been commenced, the appropriate course should be continued by the Investigation Officer, ordered the bench.