Twitter
Advertisement

High court shoots down FIR against Ajay Mafatlal

Ajay had moved court after his younger brother Atulya and sister-in-law Sheetal lodged the FIR against him and their cousin sister in December 2007.

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

The Bombay high court on Wednesday quashed a First Information Report (FIR) registered against businessman Ajay Mafatlal, 52, son of late textile tycoon Yogindra Mafatlal. Ajay had moved court after his younger brother Atulya and sister-in-law Sheetal lodged the FIR against him and their cousin sister in December 2007.

“Did the police have some different Indian Penal Code (IPC) to refer,” remarked the high court while quashing the FIR. Justice SC Dharmadhikari observed that Atulya and Sheetal can file a private complaint against Ajay, which is a right course under the law.

The police lodged an FIR against Ajay and Shailaja Parekh, 52, for allegedly intimidating Atulya and Sheetal under sections 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and 506 [II] (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code.

The court expressed its displeasure over the lack of knowledge shown by the police, while lodging an FIR under non-cognisable offence. “Only remedy to the complainants was to file a private complaint. The police could have taken action if the magistrate had directed them to do so,” observed justice Dharmadhikari.

The complainants can file a private complaint and the magistrate could thereafter direct the police to take action, if required, observed the court.

Representing Ajay and Shailaja, advocate Sayaji Nangre argued that the police could have not lodged the FIR. “Hence their subsequent investigation in the case based on the FIR is illegal, and so is the filing of the charge sheet,” said Nangre.

The petitioners also argued that the police cannot investigate into a non-cognisable offence until they seek permission from magistrate. “In the present case, the police have not taken the permission from the magistrate as required under section 155(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code,” he said.

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement