"Mr AG, your entire system needs a shaking...There is a systematic collapse. Maharashtra is supposed to be the most progressive and safest place for girls when compared to other States.” These were  words of anguish and frustration of Justice Neela Gokhale of the Bombay High Court directed at the Advocate General. A visibly livid bench of Justice A.S Gadkari and Justice Dr Neela Gokhale pulled up the Advocate General of Maharashtra ( AG) for the callous  and insensitive approach of the State police in their investigation of cases of crimes against women and children. Calling out the shoddy manner in which these cases are handled they stated that the glaring incompetency and complacency of police probes is resulting in benefits to accused and their acquittal thereafter.. The court summoned the Advocate General, Dr Birendra Saraf, to ‘urgently’ appear before them and address their concerns relating to these issues. It was the observation of the bench that  everyday they have been coming across at least 3 to 5 cases where investigations were not done properly stating that it would be understandable if  out of a 100 cases 5 are not probed satisfactorily. But if out of a 100 cases 80 are not investigated satisfactorily then nothing is fine they  stated.  Adding that the whole system needed a revamp. They demanded to know  from the Advocate General where   poor, hapless women who are victims of crimes against them should go  for redressal of their grievances.         

At pains to satisfy the court, the Advocate General , stated that  ‘’the higher officers in the force are trying to salvage the situation’’. "Whatever has happened in some cases have happened, the higher officers cannot turn the clock back. But I can assure the court that proper steps will be taken now and mistakes will be rectified," he submitted.

However the court remained unimpressed with his answers   and continued to make oral observations to his replies  countering him with facts   while hearing at least five petitions where police probes were  substandard and insensitive.   

Two matters  related to  Section 354  of IPC  (outraging the modesty of women)—one filed in Mumbai and the other in Pune in which the police failed to seize the complainants' clothing, despite clear allegations that their clothes were torn by the accused  with an intent to disrobe them. The police justified their inaction by stating that the victims had not brought spare clothing to change into.  The Commissioner of Police , Mumbai, Vivek Phansalkar, had  informed the court in an affidavit  filed earlier  pursuant to the bench’s orders in the matter of probe in the section 354 complaint   that the clothes were not  seized.  Stating also that the Mumbai police was taking every offence against women and children seriously.  The Advocate General informed the court that the constable was suspended. 

Additionally, the judges noted that in the Pune case, the investigation was conducted by a head constable.  In another case a medical student was stalked and harassed by an accused ,her ex-boyfriend, who uploaded objectionable photos of her on social media platforms. The accused continued to harass the girl even after 12 days since she filed a complaint  with the Mumbai police  and all through that time the accused continued  to upload  objectional photos.  The photos were taken off social media  only after 19 days since a petition was filed by the victim in the High court. Stating that the victim felt so hapless and traumatized   she remained closeted in her home afraid to step out lest she face the wrath of the accused who  is  absconding and untraced by the police till date.  

Another matter concerned a plea for quashing a case of 498A  filed by a man on ground of mutual settlement. The bench noted that since lodging a F.I.R against the man he continues to avoid contact  and  hadn’t   joined the investigation thus far stating that he works in Dublin, Ireland. The bench demanded to know why no efforts were made by the police to either arrest or secure the presence of the accused   even after a lapse  of 10 months wondering how a chargesheet could be filed by them in absence of the main accused. 

 The Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department ,  Iqbal Chahal, was pulled up in one of the cases in which he  filed an affidavit and  informed  the bench that the State would be revising its standard operating procedure (SOP) for probing crimes against women and children.   Expressing their dissatisfaction with the affidavits filed by the State relating to these matters Justice Gadkari stated, "We brought the issue before the highest executive of the State...not a single issue is addressed in his (Chahal's) affidavit... What they are going to do in the future is not what we are concerned with at present. We are on the lapses and serious lapses in some cases....We are not concerned you suspend him or give him some gallantry award but the evidence has gone and it will benefit the accused." 

Justice Neela Gokhale added to this by stating,’’ "Either it is neglect or lack of integrity... The senior officers give the case for investigation to the constables... So either the officer doesn't want to do his job or just wants help the accused...From top to bottom (Higher officers to Constable level) sensitization is needed... State isn't serious enough... Can we take that State isn't serious about the issue at all."

The Advocate General who was assisted by the Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar and Additional Public Prosecutor Ashish Satpute were  distinctly  told  that police is the first point of contact for a citizen who is in distress. If the police itself is incompetent and insensitive to whom will the citizens report their grievances, the  court demanded to know. 

"In future what will you do God knows but what happens to these cases? The prosecution fails. The police has filed chargesheet without proper evidence which will in the end of the day benefit the accused and you can see most of them have come to get the FIR quashed. So a clean acquittal they get because of the police," Justice Gadkari observed.

 Assuring the court that issues shall be sorted out and mistakes rectified in the best possible way   the Advocate General  on behalf of the state counsels informed the court that he would take up these issues with the Director General of Police(DGP) and the Secretary of Home Department, and take corrective measures to rectify the  wrongs in the best manner possible.