Panaji: In yet another instance of a botched probe by Goa police, a Mapusa court slammed them for their “lackadaisical” investigation into an alleged forgery case involving Serula comunidade’s attorney Peter Martins and granted him anticipatory bail.
The court said even the basic investigation to unearth the exact role of the accused was not conducted and it was done in the “most callous manner”. There was “absolutely no progress in the investigation for more than one and a half years after the registration of the FIR”.
Police have “totally forgotten their powers entrusted to them under the Criminal Procedure Code/BNSS to procure the presence of witnesses and to obtain the necessary documents,” the court said.
This is the second instance this week, where Goa police have been exposed in failing to conduct thorough investigation of cases. TOI on Monday reported that police at all levels, including investigation and monitoring by superiors, failed to prove the motive behind the murder of Vasco resident Gayatri Marathe. The murder case could not stand at the time of framing of the charges.
In the Serula comunidade case, the court said the documents were not collected from the authorities.
“No steps were taken to send the documents for forensics. The height is that not even the statement of the clerk in charge/UDC of the comunidade of Serula, whose signatures were allegedly forged, was recorded to know whether the said document is forged or a real document,” the court said.
Additional sessions Judge-2, Mapusa, Ram Subrai Prabhu Dessai said, “The investigation is conducted in a lackadaisical manner, and hence, there is absolutely no ground to deny the present bail. In fact, I would go to the extent of saying that the manner in which the investigation is done is a very good ground to grant bail to the applicant.”
The court, two weeks ago, directed the Mapusa PI to file a detailed affidavit on the investigation in the present case. The court found that the affidavit cited several instances in which the investigating officer asked various departments and authorities to submit documents or give details regarding the crime. But in all the cases, the common explanation given was that to date no reply had been received.
The court said Martins’ specific role is nowhere stated in the say given by police or even in the additional affidavit filed by the station in charge of Mapusa police upon the direction of the court.
“Merely because the applicant is the attorney of the comunidade, (it) cannot be made a basis to array him as an accused in a case of forgery of a letter issued by the comunidade in favour of a private person allotting a plot,” the court said. “In the absence of any specific role of the applicant, non-impleading the other office-bearers of the comunidade as the accused, also gains significance.”
Advocate Y Nadkarni, representing Martins, told the court that in the past, Martins himself lodged a complaint against the illegalities relating to the same plot but no inquiry was done by authorities.
Nadkarni submitted that the present FIR was registered based on the complaint of Ankit Salgaonkar, who also owns a plot in Serula comunidade and against whom Martins initiated action related to the plot.
Martins was roped into the present crime out of vindictiveness, Nadkarni said.
The charge against Martins is that as the attorney of the comunidade, he allegedly impersonated a public servant — the clerk in charge/UDC of the comunidade — and prepared a document by forging the contents and the signature on the certificate using counterfeit stamps.
He thereafter allegedly used the forged certificate while transacting in respect of Plot No. 8 of Survey No. 138/1 of the Penha de Franca and got the rights transferred, thereby cheating authorities.