The Bombay High Court on Monday slapped a fine of Rs 5,000 on a man who filed a petition levelling allegations of abduction against Government Railway Police (GRP) and an activist who had raised the issue of an alleged scam involving Railway Police Force (RPF) personnel.
The alleged scam involves a group of RPF personnel who are said to have set up fake magistrate courts and collected fines from commuters who were caught violating rules. According to the activist Samir Zaveri,the personnel issued fake bail bonds to the commuters at Kurla station during the year 2008.
A related petition was subsequently filed in the matter by Akeel Farooque,a hawker at Thane station. Farooque claimed that GRP personnel,possibly with the help of Zaveri,had abducted another hawker named Bharti Mahto.
According to him,Mahto went missing on August 10,2011 after he was arrested by the GRP. Farooque claimed that Zaveri had accompanied Mahto to the police station.
However,an affidavit filed on Monday by Shivaji Dhumal,senior inspector (GRP) at Kurla,refuted contentions made by Farooque.
Dhumal noted that no evidence was provided by him as to who informed him about the abduction,except that he was informed by another hawker of the incident.
The affidavit noted that his petition did not contain even the informers name or the mode by which he was informed.
Dhumal noted that the petitioner had provided an address of Mahto in Kalwa,but when police officials visited Kalwa later,they found that such an address does not exist.
The affidavit expressed a strong suspicion that the petitioner has only been put up as a front by some persons with a vested interest.
It further noted that Farooque was called several times to the station to record his statement,which he avoided for several days. Zaveri also told the court that he had never met any person named Mahto.
Upholding the contentions of the GRP and Zaveri,the Bench of Justice S A Bobde and Justice Mridula Bhatkar said Farooques petition appeared to be an absolutely fake case. The judges imposed costs of Rs 5,000 after the petitioner told the court that his monthly income is about Rs 4,000.