Took Three Years To Trace Accused: Bombay High Court Pulls Up Police Over Helpless Attitude In Hit & Run Case, Orders Departmental Inquiry Against IO

The Bombay High Court while deprecating the lackadaisical approach of Police for taking three years in tracing the accused in a Hit and Run Case has demanded an explanation from the Investigation Officer while directing for a departmental inquiry against him.

The Court was considering a Writ Petition seeking direction to the Government Authorities to provide details of the investigation conducted till now and further direct the Police authorities to file the Charge-sheet immediately in respect of the FIR registered under Sections 209 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 134(A) and 134(B) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Division Bench of Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Gautam A Ankhad observed, "The Affidavits filed by the police reflect an attitude of helplessness in tracing the Accused. It appears that only after this Court cautioned the police of possible consequences, did the investigation gain momentum. The lackadaisical approach adopted over the last several years is seriously depreciable. The police authorities have fallen short of the standards expected by citizens. In our view, the earlier Investigating Officers must be held accountable for their indifference. Their conduct has been nothing short of shocking and deserves condemnation."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Bharat V. Bhatia, while the Respondent was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Gauri S. Rao.

As per the FIR, a speeding truck hit the scooter from behind, causing the Petitioner’s son to fall. His helmet was dislodged, and he was subsequently run over by the truck. At the time of the incident, the Petitioner was riding a separate two-wheeler and being in a state of shock and horror, could not note down the number plate of the offending truck. The Petitioner contended that, despite registration of the FIR, the Police acted negligently and in a callous manner in concluding the investigation. Her repeated pleas to the Police to trace the culprit were disregarded by the authorities. 

The Court called out the callousness of the Police in conducting the investigation.

"A young man lost his life in a hit-and-run incident on 17th August 2022, yet it has taken nearly three years for the police to trace the Accused and file a Charge-sheet. Ms. Rao has informed us that the Accused was traced by methods such as comparing e-challans issued on the date of the incident and tracking the vehicle’s entry into Mumbai. If these steps were indeed effective, we fail to understand why they were not taken by the earlier investigating officers during the preceding three years. No explanation was forthcoming from the learned APP on this", the Court remarked.

It thus asked the Investigation Officer to explain his negligence and indifference and asked for a Departmental Inquiry to be initiated against him.

"In particular, PSI Mr. Dnyadev Pawar, who handled the investigation between 17th August 2022 and 22nd August 2024, must explain his negligence and indifference. Notably, he failed to seize the muddemaal scooter (MH-05-EF-4731), a basic step expected in such cases, and did not even bring the vehicle to the police station. This reflects a clear lack of seriousness and dereliction of duty. Further, the e-challan data, which has now formed a part of the Charge-sheet, was available from the outset. There is no justification for the failure to explore this line of inquiry earlier. The three-year delay in filing the Charge-sheet is wholly unjustifiable. We are, therefore, constrained to direct the Director General of Police to initiate a departmental inquiry against PSI Mr. Pawar for dereliction of duty and faulty investigation, and to take appropriate action in accordance with the established rules and procedure. We are informed that Mr. Pawar is presently posted with the DIG, Nagpur", the Court observed.

It also directed that the Trial Court shall expedite the proceedings and conclude the trial preferably within one year.

The Petition was accordingly disposed of.

Cause Title: Mrs. Babita Pawan Jha vs. The State of Maharashtra (2025:BHC-AS:36937-DB)

Appearances:

Petitioner- Advocate Bharat V. Bhatia, Advocate Rita Bhatia, Advocate Priyanka Pardeshi, Advocate Kirti S. Kataria 

Respondent- Additional Public Prosecutor Gauri S. Rao

Click here to read/ download Order