Bombay High Court pulls up police officer for producing fake complainant in case against Zee TV

The Bombay High Court recently came down heavily on a police officer for producing an imposter in court as the complainant in a case involving Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. [Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd v The Inspector of Police].A Bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad expressed strong disapproval of the conduct of Inspector Prafull Wagh of Nodal Cyber Police Station. “To say the least, our Judicial conscience is shocked by the conduct of this Police Officer. Even if this man Mr. Mahendra Sanjay Sharma claims to be the complainant Mr. Sunil Sharma, it clearly is a blatant lie considering the various documents on record. This case becomes more serious because this man tried to initially sign as Sunil Sharma. None of his 3 signatures (X-2, X-3 and X-4) match with the signature on the complaint,” the Court said..The Court was hearing a petition filed by Zee Entertainment challenging a police notice issued to them pursuant to a criminal complaint that sought a stay on the airing of serial 'Tum Se Tum Tak' on Zee Channel.On July 4, Zee pointed out that when Zee's officials tried to contact the complainant at his residence, they were informed that no such person lived there. Subsequently, the Court directed the concerned police officer to produce the original complainant, Sunil Sharma, along with valid proof of identity, including Aadhaar and Election Commission ID cards and documentary evidence of his permanent address..In response, Inspector Wagh brought one Mahendra Sanjay Sharma to court, identifying him as the complainant. However, upon examining identity documents and the original complaint, the Court found that Mahendra Sharma's Aadhaar and voter ID bore addresses inconsistent with the complaint. Subsequently, it asked Mahendra Sharma to sign in the open court. He signed in three different manners, but none matched the signature of the complainant.The counsel appearing on instructions from Mahendra Sanjay Sharma, submitted that Mahendra had indeed signed and filed the complaint. This was contradicted by the complaint itself which bore the name and signature of Sunil Sharma. .The Additional Public Prosecutor argued that Mahendra had met Inspector Wagh at the police station and claimed to be the complainant, prompting the officer to produce him in court.However, the bench proceeded to censure of the police officer’s actions.“It is very disturbing for the Court to record the conduct and behavior of the Police Officer, Mr. Wagh. Any attempt to hoodwink the Court and produce an imposter before the Court with the object to snatch an order, based on misinformation or wrong information, cannot be countenanced,” the Court said.The Court also noted that the matter may attract penal provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, particularly those dealing with giving false evidence to the court.Before taking further action, the Court directed both Inspector Wagh and the person produced as the complainant to file individual affidavits.The matter will next be heard on July 28 at 3 PM..Senior Advocate Sanjog Parab along with advocates Sulabha Rane, Sakshi Baadkar, Pranjal Pandey and Sangram Parab instructed by advocate Mohan Rao appeared for Zee. Additional Public Prosecutor SV Gavand appeared for the State.Advocates Veer Kankaria and Gaurav Shukla appeared for the Mahendra Sharma..[Read Order]