# 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 1145 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS v. SARANGDHAR SINGH SHIVDAS SINGH CHAVAN AND ANR

- **Citation:** [2010] 15 S.C.R. 1145
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2010-12-14
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 2374 of 2010
- **Bench:** G.S. Singhvi, Asok Kumar Ganguly
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/15-addl-s-c-r-1145-state-of-maharashtra-and-ors-v-sarangdhar-singh-shivdas-26727
- **Pages:** 41

## Headnote

A
B
Administrative law: Public administration - Abuse of
power - Complaints filed against the second respondent and c
his family members on the ground that they were indulging
in illegal money lending and charging exorbitant interest from
poor farmers - Order by Collector that as per the instructions
of the Chief Minister, the Superintendent of Police would not
register any crime against the second respondent unless
D
clearance is obtained from the District Anti Money Lending
Committee and legal opinion of the District Government
Pleader and matters would be handled as per the provisions
of Money Lending Prevention Act - Held: The instructions of
the Chief Minister were completely contrary to and inconsistent
E
with the constitutional promise of equality and a/so the
preambular resolve of social and economic justice -
Interference by the Chief Minister to specially treat any
complaints has no precedent either in law or in public
administration -
In the face of such directions, it is
inconceivable that the poor farmers can sustain their
F
complaint and the subordinate police officers can carry on
investigation ignoring such instructions of the Chief Minister
- Therefore, the instructions of the Chief Minister completely
subverted the rule of law - Chief Minister's instructions were
incongruous and anachronistic, being in defiance of all logic
G
and reason -
This Court condemned the same in no
uncertain terms - The instruction of the Chief Minister to the
Collector has no warrant in law and is unconstitutional and is
quashed - The State is directed to pay costs of Rs.10 lakhs
1145
H
1146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010115 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A in favour of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority
- The fund would be earmarked to help the cases of poor
farmers - Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946.
B
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
ss. 154, 156, 157 - Investigation - Power of police to
investigate cognizable offence - Scope of, and if special
treatment to any person .in respect of complaint disclosing the
commission of any cognizable offence, permissible - Held:
Law does not accord special treatment to any person in
C respect of complaint against him when it discloses the
commission of any cognizable offence - In the instant case,
the direction of the Chief Minister to give a special treatment
to an MLA and his family before registering complaint against
them for indulging in illegal money lending was totally
D unwarranted in law.
ss.154(1), 163, 164(3) - Ministerial interference in the
functioning of the authorities entrusted with the task of
enforcing the laws enacted by the legislature -
Cases
E involving pervasive misuse of public office for private gains
have come to light in last few decades which tend to shake
the peoples' confidence - Some members of the political
class who are entrusted with greater responsibilities and who
take oath to do their duties in accontance with the Constitution
F and the law without fear or favour, affection or ill will, have by
their acts and omissions demonstrated that they have no
respect for system based on rule of law.
Constitution of India, 1950: Part /VA - Every citizen must
do his duty towards the nation as well as the fellow citizens -
G Fundamental rights of the citizens can become meaningful
only if the State and citizens do their duty to bring about real
equality amongst the people belonging ta different segments
of the Society - Part IV-A was enacted with a fond hope that
every citizen will honestly play his role in building of a
H homogeneous society in which every Indian will be able to live
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH
114 7
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN
with dignity without having to bother about the basics like food,
A
clothing, shelter, education, medical aid and the nation will
constantly march forward and will take its place of pride in the
comity of nations - However, in last few decades, a small
fraction of the population has evolved a new value system
which is totally incom

## Text

_Characters 0–39,884 of 79,536. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39884 for what follows._

[2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 1145
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
v.
SARANGDHAR SINGH SHIVDAS SINGH CHAVAN AND
ANR.
(Criminal Appeal No. 2374 of 2010)
DECEMBER 14, 2010
[G.S. SINGHVI AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.]
A
B
Administrative law: Public administration - Abuse of
power - Complaints filed against the second respondent and c
his family members on the ground that they were indulging
in illegal money lending and charging exorbitant interest from
poor farmers - Order by Collector that as per the instructions
of the Chief Minister, the Superintendent of Police would not
register any crime against the second respondent unless
D
clearance is obtained from the District Anti Money Lending
Committee and legal opinion of the District Government
Pleader and matters would be handled as per the provisions
of Money Lending Prevention Act - Held: The instructions of
the Chief Minister were completely contrary to and inconsistent
E
with the constitutional promise of equality and a/so the
preambular resolve of social and economic justice -
Interference by the Chief Minister to specially treat any
complaints has no precedent either in law or in public
administration -
In the face of such directions, it is
inconceivable that the poor farmers can sustain their
F
complaint and the subordinate police officers can carry on
investigation ignoring such instructions of the Chief Minister
- Therefore, the instructions of the Chief Minister completely
subverted the rule of law - Chief Minister's instructions were
incongruous and anachronistic, being in defiance of all logic
G
and reason -
This Court condemned the same in no
uncertain terms - The instruction of the Chief Minister to the
Collector has no warrant in law and is unconstitutional and is
quashed - The State is directed to pay costs of Rs.10 lakhs
1145
H
1146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010115 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A in favour of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority
- The fund would be earmarked to help the cases of poor
farmers - Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946.
B
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
ss. 154, 156, 157 - Investigation - Power of police to
investigate cognizable offence - Scope of, and if special
treatment to any person .in respect of complaint disclosing the
commission of any cognizable offence, permissible - Held:
Law does not accord special treatment to any person in
C respect of complaint against him when it discloses the
commission of any cognizable offence - In the instant case,
the direction of the Chief Minister to give a special treatment
to an MLA and his family before registering complaint against
them for indulging in illegal money lending was totally
D unwarranted in law.
ss.154(1), 163, 164(3) - Ministerial interference in the
functioning of the authorities entrusted with the task of
enforcing the laws enacted by the legislature -
Cases
E involving pervasive misuse of public office for private gains
have come to light in last few decades which tend to shake
the peoples' confidence - Some members of the political
class who are entrusted with greater responsibilities and who
take oath to do their duties in accontance with the Constitution
F and the law without fear or favour, affection or ill will, have by
their acts and omissions demonstrated that they have no
respect for system based on rule of law.
Constitution of India, 1950: Part /VA - Every citizen must
do his duty towards the nation as well as the fellow citizens -
G Fundamental rights of the citizens can become meaningful
only if the State and citizens do their duty to bring about real
equality amongst the people belonging ta different segments
of the Society - Part IV-A was enacted with a fond hope that
every citizen will honestly play his role in building of a
H homogeneous society in which every Indian will be able to live
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH
114 7
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN
with dignity without having to bother about the basics like food,
A
clothing, shelter, education, medical aid and the nation will
constantly march forward and will take its place of pride in the
comity of nations - However, in last few decades, a small
fraction of the population has evolved a new value system
which is totally incompatible with the values and ideals
B
cherished by the Indian society for centuries together.
Money lending: Illegal money lending business -
Suicides by farmers - Nearly 300 farmers committed suicide
in Vidarbha region in Maharashtra as victims of illegal money C
lending business and the torture perpetrated in the recovery
of such money - Court cannot shut eyes to the stark realities.
The first respondent was an agriculturist. The
'Sananda family' of which the second respondent was a
member was engaged in the money lending business.
D
Several complaints were filed against the second
respondent and his family members alleging that they
were indulging in illegal money lending and charging
exorbitant interest from the farmers.
The first respondent filed a writ petition against the
second respondent. It was averred in the writ petition that
nearly 300 farmers committed suicide in Vidarbha region
in Maharashtra as victims of illegal money lending
business and the torture perpetrated in the recovery of
such money. It was also averred that on 31.5.2006, the
Private Secretary to the then Chief Minister (Mr. V.
Deshmukh) telephoned twice in the Potice<station to
enquire about the information regarding the offence
E
F
·registered against the second respondent and the
provision under which the case was registered. The
G
second phone call as recorded in the Station Diary
showed that the P.S. to the Chief Minister directed that
no action should be taken as instructed by the Chief
Minister and no offence should be registered. On 1.6.2006,
a meeting was held at the residence of Mr. V. Deshmukh.
H
1148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A Mr. Dilipkumar Sananda, the local MLA and a member of
Sananda family was also present in the meeting. In the
said meeting, the said MLA complained that false
complaints against his family members, complaints
regarding illegal money lending were filed and without
B scrutinity of the truthfulness of the said complaints,
offences were registered. Order dated 5.6.2006 was
passed by the Collector that as instructed by the Chief
Minister (Mr. V. Deshmukh), police would not register any
crime against the second respondent without obtaining
c clearance from the District Anti Money Lending
Committee and also without legal opinion of the District
Government Pleader and matters against the Sananda
family would be handled as per the provisions of Money
Lending Prevention Act.
D
The High Court allowed the writ petition. It held that
E
F
the order dated 5.6.2006 and the telephonic message
recorded on 31.5.2006 exhibited gross abuse of power by
the concerned authority and struck down both the
communications. The State filed the instant appeal.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD:
Per Ganguly, J:
1.1. The legal position is well settled that on
information being lodged with the police and if the said
information discloses the commission of a cognizable
offence, the police shall record the same in accordance
G with the provisions contained under Section 154, Cr.P.C.
Police Officer's power to investigate in case of a
cognizable offence without order of the Magistrate is
statutorily recognized under Section 156, Cr.P.C. Thus,
the police officer in charge of a police station, on the basis
H of information received or otherwise, can start
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH 1149
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN
investigation, if he has reasons to suspect the A
commission of any cognizable offence. This is subject to
the provisos (a) and (b) to Section 157, Cr.P.C. which
leaves discretion with the police officer-in-charge of
police station to consider if the information is not of a
serious nature, he may depute a subordinate officer to
B
investigate and if it appears to the officer-in-charge that
there does not exist sufficient ground, he shall not
investigate. This legal framework is a very vital
component of the rule of law in order to ensure prompt
investigation in cognizable cases and to maintain law and c
order. Law does not accord any special treatment to any
person in respect of any complaint having been filed
against him when it discloses the commission of any
cognizable offence. In the context of this clear legal
position, the direction of the then Chief Minister to give 0
a special treatment to Shri Dilip Kumar Sananda, M.L.A
and his family about registering of complaint filed against
them was totally unwarranted in law. [Paras 21 to 24]
[1165-A-H; 1166-A-B]
1.2. From the communication of the Collector E
containing the instructions of the then Chief Minister, Mr.
V. Deshmukh, it is clear that the Chief Minister was aware
of various complaints being filed against the said family.
Even then he passed an order for a special treatment in
favour of the said family which is unknown to law. This
F
was obviously done to protect the Sananda family from
the normal legal process and a special procedure was
directed to be adopted in respect of criminal complaint
filed against them. It is clear from the Collector's order
dated 5.6.2006 where the Chief Minister's instructions G
were quoted that the Chief Minister was acting solely on
political consideration to screen the family of M.L.A from
the normal process of law. [Para 27) [1116-E-H]
2.1. The court cannot shut eyes to the stark realities.
H
1150 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A From the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), it is
clear that close to two lakh farmers committed suicide in
India between 1997 and 2008. This is the largest sustained
wave of suicides ever recorded in human history. Twothirds of the two lakh suicides took place in five States
8 and those five States are Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh,
Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Even
though Maharashtra is one of the richest State in the
country· and in its capital Mumbai twenty five thousand
of India's one lakh dollar millionaires reside, the Vidarbha
C region of Maharashtra, in which is situated Buldhana, is
today the worst place in the whole country for farmers.
Professor K. Nagraj of the Madras Institute of
Development Studies who carried on a research in this
area has categorized that Maharashtra could be called the
graveyard of farmers. The position is so pathetic in
D Vidarbha region that families are holding funerals and
weddings at the same time and some time on the same
day. In a moving show of solidarity poor villagers are
accumulating their money and labour to conduct
marriages and funerals of their poor neighbours. This
E being the ground reality, as the Chief Minister of the State
and as holding a position of great responsibility as a high
constitutional functionary, Mr. V. Deshmukh certainly
acted beyond all legal norms by giving the impugned
directions to the Collector to protect members of a
F particular family who are dealing in money lending
business from the normal process of law. This amounts
to bestowing special favour to some chosen few at the
cost of the vast number of poor people who as farmers
have taken loans and who have come to the authorities
G of law and order to register their complaints against
torture and atrocities by the money lenders. T.he
instructions of the Chief Minister will certainly impede
their access to legal redress and bring about a failure of
the due proces·s. The said action of the Chief Minister is
H completely contrary to and inconsistent with the
STATE OF MAHA~ASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH 1151
SHIVDASSINGH Cr.IAVAN
constitutional proril'ise of equality and also the A
preambular resolve of social and economic justice. As a
Chief Minister of the State Mr. Deshmukh has taken a
solemn of oath of allegiance to the Constitution but the
directions which he gave were wholly unconstitutional
and sought to subvert the constitutional norms of equality
B
and social justice. [Paras 29 to 32] [1167-B-H; 1168-A-C]
Report in Hindu dated 22nd May 2006 -
r~ferred to.
2.2. The fact that some of the cases in which
pomplaints were filed against the family of Sananda, were C
investigated and chargesheets were filed cannot justify
the issuing of the wholly unauthorised and
unconstit4tional instructions to the Collector. It is not
known as to how many cases investigation had been
totally s·cuttled in view of the impugned directions. D
; Records disclosed in the instant case that out of 74
cases only in 7 cases chargesheets were filed and the
rest of the cases were either compromised or withdrawn.
l'n the face of such directions, it is inconc~ivable that the
poor farmers can sustain their complaint and the
E
subordinate police officers can carry on investigation
ignoring such instructions of the Chief Minister.
Therefore, the instructions of the Chief Minister have
completely subverted the Rule of Law. This Court noted
extreme anguish that such an instruction came from the
F
.Chief Minister of a State which is governed under a
Constitution which resolves to constitute India into a
socialist, secular, democratic republic. Chief Minister's
instructions were incongruous and anachronistic, being
in defiance of all logic and reason. This Court condemned G
the same in no uncertain terms. The order of the High
Court is affirmed. The instruction of the Chief Minister to
the Collector dated 5.6.06 has no warrant in law and is
unconstitutional and is quashed. The appellant is
H
1152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A directed to pay costs of Rupees Ten Lakhs in favour of
the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority. This
fund shall be earmarked by the Authority to help the cases
of poor farmers. [Paras 33, 38, 39] [1168-D-F; 1169-D-F]
Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
B 2008 (14) SCC 337 - distinguished.
Per Singhvi J: (supplementing)
1.1. Though each of XXll Parts of the Constitution has
c its own significance, the common man is by and large
concerned with Parts Ill, IV and IV-A, the last having been
added by the Forty-second Amendment Act, 1976. Part111 of the Constitution enumerates various fundamental
rights guaranteed to the citizens and even non-citizens.
0 The provisions of Part-IV contain directive principles of
State policy which are fundamental for the governance
of the country. The State has been obligated to enact
laws for improving the lot of the weaker sections of the
society and the rural population so that the goals of
social justice and equality can be achieved. By
E incorporating Part IVA in the Constitution, the Parliament
has emphasized what is obvious, that is, every citizen
must do his duty towards the nation as well as the fellow
citizens because unless every one does his duty, it is not
possible to achieve the goals of equality and justice
F enshrined in the Preamble. Article 51A enjoins upon every
citizen to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals
and institutions, the National Flag and the National
Anthem; to cherish and follow the noble ideals which
inspired our national struggle for freedom; to uphold and
G protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India; to
promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood
amongst all the people irrespective of religion, language,
region etc. and to renounce practices derogatory to the
dignity of women; to value and preserve the rich heritage
H
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH
1153
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN
of our composite culture; to protect and improve the A
natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and
wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures; to
develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit
of inquiry and reform; to safeguard public property and
to abjure violence; and to strive towards excellence in
B
all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the
nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and
achievement. What has been incorporated in the form of
Part IV-A was implicit in the Preamble, Part Ill and PartIV of the Constitution
1 because fundamental rights of the c
citizens can become meaningful only if the State and
citizens do their duty to bring about real equality
amongst the people belonging to different segments of
the Society. Part IV-A of th~ Constitution was enacted
with a fond hope that every citizen will honestly pl~,,his 0
role in building of a homogeneous society in which every
Indian will be able to live with dignity without having to
bother about the basics like food, clothing, shelter,
education, medical aid and the nation will constantly
march forward and will take its place of pride in the
E
comity of nations. However, what has happened in last
few decades has given rise to serious apprehensions
whether we will be able to achieve the objectives which
were in the mind of the makers of the Constitution. The
gap between 'haves' and 'haves not' of the society which
existed even in pre-independent India has widened to
F
such an extent that it may take many decades before
even a token equality is restored. A small fraction of the
population has evolved a new value system which is
totally incompatible with the values and ideals cherished
by the Indian society for centuries together. They believe G
in achieving their goals without regard to purity of the
means. [Paras 3, 4, 5) [1170-F-H; 1171-A-H; 1172-A-B]
1.2. Under the Constitution, the executive power of
the State vests in the Governor and is required to be
H
1154 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A exercised by him either directly or through officers
subordinate to him in accordance with the Constitution
[Article 154(1 )]. Article 163 mandates that there shall be
Council of Ministers with the Chief Minister as the head
to aid and advise the Governor in the exercise of his
8
functions, except in so far as he is by or under the
Constitution required to exercise his functions or any of
them in his discretion. Article 164 lays down that the Chief
Minister shall be appointed by the Governor and the other
Ministers shall be appointed by the Governor on the
C advice of the Chief Minister, and the Minister shall hold
office during the pleasure of the Governor. Article 164(3)
lays down that the Governor shall before a Minister enters
upon his office, administer to him the oath of office and
secrecy according to the form set out in the Third
0
Schedule, in terms of which, the Minister is required to
take oath that he shall discharge his duties in accordance
with the Constitution and the law without fear or favour, ,
affection or ill will. However, the cases involving
pervasive misuse of public office for private gains, which
have come to light in last few decades tend to shake the
E peoples' confidence and one is constrained to think that
India has freed itself from British colonialism only to
come in the grip of a new class, which tries to rule on the
same colonial principles. Some members of the political ·
class who are entrusted with greater responsibilities and
F who take oath to do their duties in accordance with the
Constitution and the law without fear or favour, affection
or ill will, have by their acts and omissions demonstrated
that they have no respect for system based on rule of law.
G
[Para 6) [1172-C-H]
C.S. Rowjee v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1964) 6 SCR
330; Chandrika Jha v. State of Bihar (1984) 2 SCC 41;
Surendra Kumar v. State of Bihar (1984) 4 SCC 609; Suman
Gupta v. State of J. & K. AIR 1983 SC 1235; Shivajirao
H Nilangekar Patil v. Mahesh Madhav Gosavi (1987) 1 SCC
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH 1155
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN
227; Secretary, JD.A. v. Dau/at Mal Jain (1997) 1 SCC 35 -
A
relied on.
R V. Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1968) 1 All. E.R.
763; Magill v. Porter (2002) 2 AC 357 - referred to.
3. The facts of the instant case showed that with a
B
view to frustrate the complaint made by the first
respondent, the second respondent, his family members
and some other money lenders were harassing him and
other farmers and also stalling the action likely to be
initiated by the concerned police authorities under the C
Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946. Shri Dilip Kumar
Sananda, a member of the Legislative Assembly
approached the Chief Minister for a special treatment. In
the first place., the Principal Secretary of the Chief Minister
made enquiries from the police station about the cases
D
registered against Sananda. Thereafter, the Chief Minister1
without verifying the truthfulness or otherwise of the
assertion of Shri Dilip Kumar Sananda t!lat false
complaints were being lodged against his family
members, issued instructions that complaint against the •. E
concerned M.L.A. and his family members should be first
placed before the District Anti-Money Lending Committee,
which should obtain legal opinion of the District
Government Pleader and then only police take decision
on the same and take appropriate legal action. The
F
camouflage of sophistry used by the then Chief Minister
_ in the instructions given by him and the affidavit filed ·
before this Court was clearly misleading. The message
to the authorities was loud and clear i.e. they were not to
take the complaints against Sananda family seriously and
G
not to proceed against them. The District Magistrate, the
District Superintendent of Police and officers subordinate
to them were bound to comply with the same in their
letter and spirit. They could disregard those instructions
at their own peril and none of them was expected to do
H
1156 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A so. The District Anti-Money Lending Committee was
constituted by the Government of Maharashtra by
resolution no. MLA.1204/CR/280/C/7/S dated 19th
October, 2009 for protecting the farmers against
unscrupulous money lenders and not for protecting the
8
wrong doers, but in total disregard of the scheme of the
Act, the Chief Minister gave instructions which had the
effect of frustrating the object of the legislation enacted
for protection cif the farmers. The instructions given ·by
the Chief Mir;1ster to District Collector, Buldhana were ex
C facie ultra vires the provisions of the Act which do not
envisage any role of the Chief Minister in cases involving
violation of the provisions of the Act and amounted to an
unwanted interference with the functioning of the
authorities entrusted with the task of enforcing the Act
0
enacted for regulating, controlling transactions of money
lending and protecting unsuspecting borrowers against
oppression and harassment at the hands of
unscrupulous money lenders. [Para 9) [1184-B-H; 1185A-C]
E
Case Law Reference:
2008 (14) sec 337
distinguished
Paras 34,
35, 37
(1964) 6 SCR 330
relied on
Para 7
F
(1984) 2 sec 41
relied on
Para 7
(1984) 4 sec 609
relied on
Para 7
AIR 1983 SC 1235
relied on
Para 7
G
(1987) 1 sec 221
relied on
Para 7
(1997) 1 sec 35
relied on
Para 7
(1968) 1 All. E.R. 763
relied on
Para 7
H
(2002) 2 AC 357
relied on
Para 7
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH 1157
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal
A
No. 2374 of 2010.
From the Judgment & Order dated 05.03.2009 of the High
Court of Judicature at Bombay, bench at Nagpur in Criminal
Writ Petition No. 330 of 2006.
U.U. Lalit, Sanjay Kharde, Shankar Chillarge (for Asha
Gopalan Nair) for the Appellants. .
B
Dr. Abhishek SinJhvi, Abhimanyu Bhandari, Naveen
Kumar, (for Vilas Rao Deshmukh), A.P. Mayee, Chorudatta c
Mahendrakar, Sachin Sharma, Manish Pitale, Wasi Haider (for
Chander Shekhar Ashri) for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
GANGULY, J. 1. Leave granted.
2. The fact~ of each case, which come up to this Court and
especially those which are heard at length as appeals, have a
D
. message to convey. The message conveyed in this case is
extremely shocking and it shocks the conscience of this Court
E
about the manner in which the Constitutional functionaries
behaved in the State of Maharashtra.
3. Awrit petition was filed before Bombay High Court by
Sarangdharsingh Shivdassingh Chavan - the first respondent
in this appeal. He described himself as an agriculturist by
profession. The allegation in the writ petition is of illegal money
lending against the second respondent to the extent of charging
10% interest per month on the money lent.
F
4. In view of such exorbitant interest being charged and · G
the illegalities which are alleged be committed in the recovery
of such loan, certain complaints were filed against the second
respondent and in the writ petition it is stated that as many as
34 complaints were registered against the second respondent
till 28.6.2006.
H
1158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A
5. It was also averred in the writ petition that nearly 300
farmers have committed suicide in Vidarbha region of
Maharashtra as victims of such illegal money lending business
and the torture perpetrated in the recovery of such money. A
complaint has been made that the farmers do not get the benefit
B of various packages announced by the Government and the
State machinery is ruthless against the farmers. The cause of
action for filing the writ petition is the order of Collector in the
District of Buldhana (hereinafter "Collector") directing not to
register any crime against Mr. Gokulchand Sananda, the
c second respondent herein, without obtaining clearance from the
District Anti Money Lending Committee and also without
obtaining legal opinion of the District Government Pleader. It
appears that the said order was passed by the Collector in view
of the instructions given to him by the then Chief Minister of
0
Maharashtra. It has been alleged in the petition that there are
several complaints and the number of such complaints is about
50 against Sananda and his family members who are carrying
on money lending business and the cases cannot be registered
against them in view of the instructions given by the then Chief
Minister.
E
F
G
H
6. In order to understand the seriousness of the situation,
it will be appropriate in the fitness of things, to set out the order
dated 5.6.2006 of the Collector, Buldhana to the District
Superintendent of Police, Buldhana:
'To
District Superintendent of Police
Buldhana
Sub: Regarding complaints against illegal money lending
against MLA Dilipkumar Sananda and his family
members.
Ref: instructions given by Hon'ble Chief Minister in
meeting dated 1.6.2006.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR 91NGH 1159
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN [ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, J.]
On the above mentioned subject, detailed
A
discussion tobk place at the residence of Hon'ble Chief
Minister on 1.6.2006. In the said meeting, MLA Dilipkumar
Sananda complained that deliberately by raising false
allegations, against his family members, complaints
regarding illegal money lending are being filed and without
B
scrutinizing truthfulness of the said complaints, offences
are being registered. In respect of said grievance, Hon'ble
Chief Minister has taken serious note and given order that
'if any such complaint is received then before registration
of offence against MLA Dilipkumar Sananda and his family c
members, said matter/complaint be placed for decisio.n
before District Anti-Money Lending Committee and siid
Committee should obtain legal opinion of District
Government Pleader and then only take decision on the
same and take appropriate legal action accordingly'.
You are informed that as per the instructions of
Hon'ble Chief Minister, matters against Sananda family be
handled as per the provisions of Money Lending
Prevention Act."
D
7. It may be noticed that prior to the aforesaid discussion
E
which the Collector had at the residence of the Chief Minister
on 1.6.2006 in which meeting Mr. Dilipkumar Sananda, local
MLA was present, something happened in the Police Station,
Khamgaon City, District Buldhana on 31.5.2006. The said
station diary shows that Mr. Padwal, P.S. to the Chief Minister
F
telephoned twice to enquire about "the information regarding
the offence" registered against Sananda and the Section under
which the case has been registered. The second phone call as
recorded in Station Diary shows that Mr. Padwal directed that
no action should be taken as instructed by the Chief Minster
G
and no offence should be registered. The text of the station diary
dated 31.5.2006 is set out:
H
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
1160 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
~
"Station Diary
Police Station Khamgaon City, District Buldhana, dated
31.5.2006
Station
Time
Diary
Entry
No.
26
13.15
hrs.
27
13.15
hrs.
Summary
Particulars of Entry ---1
of the
Entry
Phone
from
PS to
Hon.
CM
Phone
from
PS to
Hon.
CM
At this time, Mr. Padwal,
PS to Hon'ble Chief
Minister, MS dialed and
enquired about the information regarding offence
registered against
Sananda; we informed
that offence is registered
at 12.15 hrs.
At this time, Mr. Padwal
enquired about facts of
the offence registered,
sections applied; then we
informed them about
sections applied to the
said registered offence,
then he told that
henceforth no action be
taken as instructed by
Hon'ble CM and further
said that again no other
offences be registered.
Sd/-
Police Inspector
Khamgaon City Police Station
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH 1161
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN [ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, J.]
8. On the writ petition being filed challenging the aforesaid
A
two communications, namely, the communication made by the
P.S. to the Chief Minister vide the Station diary entry which is
set out above and the order of Collector on the direction of the
Chief Minister, the High Court in the impugned judgment allowed
the writ petition. The High Court, inter alia, held that the
B
directions of the Chief Minister in the telephonic message was
proved by the communication of the Collector dated 5.6.2006
and the High Court held that such telephonic communication was
made at the behest of Gokulchand Sananda, the seco.nd
respondent herein. The High Court after examining the c
provisions of the Bombay Money Lenders Act and also the
materials on record held that the letter dated 5.6.2006 and the
telephonic message recorded in the Station diary entry exhibit
gross abuse of power by the concerned authority and struck
down both the communications.
D
9. The High Court, however, recorded that on the complaint
filed by the writ petitioner - the first respondent herein, a
chargesheet was filed for offences under Sections 341, 342,
363, 392, 504 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and
Section 32B of the Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946. The
E
criminal case is pending. The High Court also observed that they
are not aware how many instances of illegal money lending do
exist. The High Court expressed a hope that power of the
·
Executive will not be abused in the manner in which it has been
done in this case. The High Court, quashed the Collector's
F
order and allowed the writ petition awarding costs of Rs.25,000/
- to be paid by the State Government.
10. However, the State of Maharashtra did not accept the
judgment of the High Court and challenged the same before this
Court by filing a special leave petition out of which the present G
appeal arises.
11. From the affidavit which was filed by the Collector
before the High Court, it appears that the Collector has admitted
H
1162 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A
that in Vidarbha region in Buldhana District the farmers
committed suicide for various reasons and especially for the
loan burden coupled with the fact that there was irregular rain
fall.
B
12. The Collector admitted in paragraph (3) of the affidavit
that on the complaint of Sananda before the Chief Minister
about cases being registered against him and his family
members without investigation, the Chief Minister called the
Collector at Mumbai and gave the instructions quoted above
and thereupon the Collector conveyed the message of the Chief
C
Minister to the Superintendent of Police, Buldhana. However,
the Collector took a stand that by doing so he has not committed
any illegality.
13. In the affidavit of the Superintendent of Police,
D
Buldhana before the High Court, he admits that there are five
cases already registered against the family members of
Sananda under the Bombay Money Lenders Act and he has
given details of those cases in his affidavit. He also subn;iitted
that on 31.5.2006 an offence came to be registered at police
E
station, Khamgaon (T) on the complaint made by Shri Rajesh
Shankar Kawadkar under Sections 341, 366, 392 read with
Section 34 IPC and under Section 32(b) and 33 of the Bombay
M6ney Lenders Act. He also admits to have received
instructions from the Collector by the Collector's order dated
F
5.6.2006 about the Collector's meeting with the then Chief
Minister of the Maharashtra and also about the manner in which
the police has to deal with the complaints against Dilip Kumar
Sananda and his family members. He further averred in his
affidavit that by letter dated 9.6.2006 the Superintendent of
Police conveyed that as per Section 154 of Criminal Procedure
G Code cognizable complaints are to be registered without undue
delay. However, on receipt of the said letter the Collector sent
his letter dated 14.6.2006 stating therein that under Section 36
of the Cr.P.C. the State Government can direct a senior police
officer to take cognizance of the offence also.
H
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH 1163
SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN [ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, J.]
14. In the course of hearing of this case, this Court by an
A
order dated 11th February 2010 directed the learned counsel
for the appellant to file an affidavit on the following points:
"1.
The number of cases involving complaints against
respondent No.2 and/or his family members.
2. The number of cases in which FIR have been registered
against respondent No.2 and/or his family members.
B
3. The number of cases in which instructions like the one
contained in letter dated 05.06.2006 of District Collector,
_(;
Buldhana were or have been given by Hon'ble the Chief ·
Minister or any other functionary or authority of the State
Government."
15. Pursuant thereto an additional affidavit was filed by one
Ambadas, Assistant Police Inspector, posted to P.S. Khamgaon
D
Gramin, District Buldhana, Maharashtra to the effect that 34
complaints were received in different police stations in
Buldhana District against the members of Sananda family. In
the affidavit it was also stated that in seven complaints
chargesheets have been filed and the same are pending before
E
different Courts below. In respect of other complaints the
complainants have either settled their disputes or havo
withdrawn their complaints. It was also stated that not a single
person including any member of the complainant's family has
committed suicide in view of dispute over money lending by
F
Sananda family. This averment was, however, not necessary
in terms of the order dated 11.2.10.
16. This Court has looked into the resolution dated 19th
October 2005 which purports to constitute the said committee
G
and this Court finds that the said committee has not been
constituted in exercise of any statutory power and the said
committee consists of the following persons:
"1. District Collector of the concerned District - President
H
1164 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A
2. District Superintendent of Police - Member
3. District Registrar, Cooperative Society - Member
Secretary."
17. This Court, therefore, finds that the contention of the
B
learned counsel for the first respondent is correct and so far
as the said committee is concerned it is not a statutory body.
18. Since, the learned counsel for the· first respondent was
arguing on the propriety of directions given by the then Chief
c Minister of Maharashtra and also on the propriety of Chief
Minister's Personal Secretary making teler.hone calls to the
police station and giving instructions as to how complaints
should be registered against the family of the second
respondent, this Court thought that the then Chief Minister of
D
Maharashtra, who was initially not a party to this proceeding,
should be impleaded and be given a chance to make his
representation before the Court. Therefore, this Court by an
order dated 31st March 2010, gave notice to the then Chief
Minister of State of Maharashtra, presently Union Minister,
Department of Heavy Industries, Government of India and
E directed service of the entire paper book of Special Leave
Petition on him in order to enable him to file an affidavit in the
context of the letter dated 5th June 2006 sent by the Collector
to the District Superintendent of the Police, Buldhana.
F
19. Pursuant to the said notice an affidavit was filed by Shri
Vilasrao Deshmukh, the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra. In
paragraph 5 of the said affidavit the content of the letter of the
Collector dated 5.6.06 was not denied. Nor was it denied that
on 31.5.06, his Private Secretary made two telephone calls to
G the concerned Police Station enquiring about cases registered
against Sananda. However, in the said affidavit Mr. Deshmukh
stated that he never interfered with any pending investigation
against the family of Sananda and he further stated that
investigation was conducted and the chargesheet was filed.
H
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. SARANGDHAR SINGH
1165
· SHIVDASSINGH CHAVAN [ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, J.]
20. Considering the entire matter in its proper perspective,
A
this Court is of the view that the way interference was caused
first from the office of the Chief Minister by his Private Secretary
by two telephone calls on 31.5.2006 and the manner in which
District Collector was summoned by the Chief Minister on the
very next day i.e. 1.6.2006 for giving instructions to specially
B
treat any complaints filed against M.L.A. Mr. Dilip Kumar
Sananda and his family has no precedent either in law or in
public administration.
·
21. The legal position is well settled that on information
C
being lodged with the police and if the said information
discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the police
shall record the same in accordance with the provisions
contained under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code.·
Police Officer's power to investigate in case of a cognizable
offence without order of the Magistrate is statutorily recognised
D
under Section 156 of Code. Thus the police officer in charge
of a police station, on the basis of information received or
otherwise, can start investigation if he has reasons to suspect
the commission of any cognizable offence.
.,
22. This is subject to the provisos (a) and (b) to Section
157 of the Code which leaves discretion with the police officerin-charge of police station to consider if the information is not
of a serious nature, he may depute a subordinate officer to
E
~ investigate and if it appears to the officer-in-charge that there
F
does not exist sufficient ground, he shall not investigate.
23. This legal framework is a very vital component of the
Rule of Law in order to ensure prompt investigation in
cognizable cases and to maintain law and order.
. 24. Law does not accord any special treatment to any
person in respect of any complaint having been filed against
him when it discloses the commission of any cognizable
offence. In the context of this clear iegal position which, as noted
G
H
1166 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
A
above, is a vital component of a Rule of Law, the direction ·Of
the then Chief Minister to give a special treatment to Shri Dilip
Kumar Sananda, M.L.A and his family about registering of
complaint filed against them is totally unwarranted in law. Mr.
Vilasrao Deshmukh as the Chief Minister of State of
B
Maharashtra is expected to know that the farmers of the State
specially those in the Vidarbha region are going through a great
deal of suffering and hardship in the hands of money lenders.
25.