Mumbai, March 29 A sessions court in Mumbai has directed a magistrate to issue summons to former Maharashtra Director General of Police Satish Mathur and other senior officers for failing to register an FIR against MHADA officials in a complaint of alleged fraud.
After issuing the summons, the magistrate has been directed to proceed further by recording evidence from the complainant and witnesses.
Additional Sessions Judge Mujibodeen S Shaikh, earlier this month, 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 reprimanded the officers for keeping the complaint pending for over two years under the guise of an "inquiry", while waiting for opinions from the very government departments they were meant to investigate.
The court found that the actions of the officers constituted "the omission to consider the prevailing laws and another facet of negligence or dereliction of duty".
When there was ample evidence that MHADA officials in collusion with developers caused wrongful loss to the government, it was the duty of the respondents to register the FIR immediately, the court said.
"Now the time has also come to make it clear that no one is above the law, and the law does not protect those who misuse their office/designation to benefit themselves and cause wrongful loss to the state," the judge said in the order.
The order passed by the magistrate was "misguided and erroneous" and needs to be quashed and set aside, Judge Shaikh said.
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.
According to Shenoy's complaint, private developers had failed to surrender 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 that MHADA and police officials "wilfully and deliberately" failed to register a First Information Report (FIR) despite evidence of a cognizable offence.
Citing a Supreme Court order, the court ruled that if a complaint discloses a cognizable offence, police have no option but to register an FIR immediately.
"In the case at hand, the respondents (officers) have shown disregard to 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 due to the widespread nature of corrupt activities in public administration.
The court then 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), and 218 (creating fake or incorrect report) and 34 (common intention).