AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.P. Lavande, J.—Heard Mr. Kerkar, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Fernandes, Learned Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Mr. Ferreira, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent no. 3.
Rule. By consent of the Learned Counsel for the parties, heard forthwith.
By this petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs :
A. For a Writ of Certiorari and or any other Writ in the nature of Certiorari, order or direction calling for the records and proceedings of Complaint No. SPCA/6/2009 on the file of the State Police Complaints Authority at Panaji and the records of the application for setting aside exparte order dated 30/05/2011 and upon perusing the impugned order dated 05/05/2011 and the order dated 01/06/2011 passed by the State Police Complaints Authority at Panaji in Complaint No. SPCA/6/2009 and upon going through the legality and propriety of the same be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 05/05/2011 and the order dated 01/06/2011 passed by the State Police Complaints Authority at Panaji on the file of the Complaint No. SPCA/6/2009 and thereby allow the application for setting aside the exparte order dated 05/05/2011 and consequently direct the said Authority to recall the witness.
AA. That this Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ in the nature of Mandamus, quashing the impugned notification, quashing and setting aside order dated 03/04/2007 constituting the State Level Police Complaints Authority.
AAA. That this Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other writ directing respondent no. 2 to appoint the police complaints authorities in accordance with the Judgment of the Supreme Court dated 22/09/2006 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 310/1996 in the matter of Prakash Singh and Ors. Vs/ Union of India.
B. Ex-parte ad interim stay in terms of prayer clause (a).
C. Any other order this Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.
Mr. Kerkar, Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the petitioner is not pressing the reliefs A(A) and AAA.
The main prayer sought in the petition is to set aside the orders dated 5th May, 2011 and 1st June, 2011 passed by the State Police Complaints Authority, Panaji (''The State Authority'' for short) in Complaint No. SPCA/06/2009 filed by respondent no. 1 before The State Authority. By order dated 5th May, 2011, the State Authority closed the evidence of the witness of the complainant-respondent no. 1 herein namely Manohar Dhargavi. The petitioner herein moved an application on 30th May, 2011 to set aside the said order which was dismissed by The State Authority by order dated 1st June, 2011.
Ms. Fernandes, Learned Counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 submits that respondent no. 1 has no objection if both the orders are set aside subject to imposition of costs.
In view of the statement made on behalf of respondent no. 1, the impugned orders dated 5th May, 2011 and 1st June, 2011 passed by The State Authority are hereby quashed and set aside subject to payment of costs of Rs. 2,500/- by the petitioner to respondent no. 1, within a period of two weeks.
In view of the above, Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms.
Writ Petition stands disposed of.