2018 assault on police officer: Case against media student quashed

Advocates Abhijeet A Desai, Surbhi Agrawal and Vishal Dharade, representing the petitioner, submitted that being a mass media student, their client was on a project to collect photographs and information on Ganpati Visarjan and he had no intention of committing the offence in question.

2018 police officer assault case, media student plea, Marve beach, Ganpati Visarjan, indian express, indian express news

The court opined that the offence under Section 353 of the IPC made against the petitioner “cannot be inferred” from the contents of the FIR. (express photo)

Listen to this article

00:00

1x 1.5x 1.8x

The Bombay High Court recently quashed and set aside an FIR and chargesheet filed against a 26-year-old media student, who was booked for allegedly assaulting a police officer near Marve beach in September 2018.

The applicant, a media student planning to pursue higher studies abroad, had visited the beach during Ganpati Visarjan to photograph the ritual.

On June 14, a division bench of Justices Nitin W Sambre and Sharmila U Deshmukh passed an order seeking to quash the FIR registered by an official of Malvani police station in 2018, the chargesheet for which was filed in April 2019.

In April 2022, a coordinate bench of the high court granted interim relief to the man and directed the magistrate court to commit the case to a sessions judge while asking the latter not to frame charges against the applicant until further orders.

According to the prosecution, on the evening of September 14, 2018, the police official was on duty for Ganpati Visarjan at Marve beach when post-midnight, three to four people were seen trying to enter the sea for immersion of Ganesh idols. However, the police officials warned them against the same.

Thereafter, it is alleged, the applicant assaulted the complainant police official, created a nuisance and obstructed the police from discharging their duty. The same month, the sessions court granted bail to the petitioner.

Advocates Abhijeet A Desai, Surbhi Agrawal and Vishal Dharade, representing the petitioner, submitted that being a mass media student, their client was on a project to collect photographs and information on Ganpati Visarjan and he had no intention of committing the offence in question.

The lawyers argued that from the language used in the FIR, the necessary ingredients of the offence punishable under section 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty) of the IPC cannot be inferred.

After perusing submissions and material on record, the bench observed, “It appears that the petitioner tried to enter into deep water while continuing with the video shooting. Instructions issued by the police authorities not to enter into the deep water were resisted by continuing with the shooting by the applicant.” However, it added, “From the allegation in the FIR, we do not see that the petitioner has assaulted or used criminal force against the public servant, i.e., the complainant so as to deter him from his official duty. What can be noticed is that the petitioner has not followed the instructions given by the said police officer. ”