Coming to the aid of a pregnant woman whose carpenter husband died after being knocked down from his motorcycle by a police jeep, the Madras High Court Bench here has come down heavily upon the Gandarvakottai police in Pudukottai district for closing the accident case abruptly by blaming the carpenter of rash and negligent driving.
Smelling fish in the way the case had been dealt with, Justice S. Vimala set aside the closure report and ordered a Crime Branch-Criminal Investigation Department (CB-CID) probe. She made it clear that an officer in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police should investigate the case since the jeep had been driven by a Sub-Inspector of Police when the accident took place on May 30, 2013.
“My heroes are those who risk their lives everyday to protect our world and make it a better place — police, fire fighters and members of our armed forces said Sidney Sheldon appreciating the work of the police. When duties and responsibilities of the respondent are expected to be like that, what is the conduct of the police herein?” the judge questioned before going into the facts of the case.
Allowing a criminal revision case filed by the carpenter’s wife S. Muthamilselvi who had challenged Pudukottai Judicial Magistrate’s acceptance of the closure report on November 11, 2014, Ms. Justice Vimala said that the “legal maxim nemo iudex in causa sua literally meaning that no one should be a judge in his own cause” would squarely apply to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
The judge wondered how the Magistrate could have accepted the closure report despite the victim’s wife having filed a protest petition stating that her husband was killed when he was on his way home for lunch and there was no indication in the post mortem report that he was under the influence of alcohol, as claimed by the police in the closure report, at the time of riding the two-wheeler.
“Adding insult to the injury, the Magistrate has also chosen to return a private complaint filed by the woman under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that already her protest petition had been dismissed. If the private complaint had been taken on file, at least that would have given some remedy to the petitioner… The Magistrate has not chosen to do even that,” the judge lamented.
