Mumbai: The Maharashtra government has informed the Bombay High Court that it has set up a committee to review cases registered against persons for violation of prohibitory orders during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, the cases registered against MPs and MLAs cannot be taken back by the committee without the permission of the high court.
The government resolution was issued on September 28.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere SM Modak was informed about the GR during the hearing in a petition by a Mumbai-based advocate seeking quashing of a case registered against him. An offence was registered against him for not wearing a mask in a market place in Sangli.
According to the GR, the committee will review and will have the power to take back the cases in certain cases that were registered during the lockdown period.
While deciding on takin back cases, the committee will consider that no government servant or frontline worker was attacked and no private or public property above Rs 50,000/- was damaged.
In cases, where the damage to public property is less than Rs 50,000 the committee can take back the case after recovering the damages from the accused proportionately.
However, citing a Supreme Court judgment, the GR states that the committee will not have the powers to decide to take back cases registered against MPs and MLAs without approval from the high court.
Public prosecutor (PP) in the cases which have been taken back will have to inform the concerned court immediately. The court decision will then have to be conveyed to the committee by the PP, states the GR.
There will be two types of committees, one at the police Commissionerate levels – which will be headed by zonal DCP; and the other at district levels – which will be headed by District Regional ACP.
According to the advocate, he and his parents shifted temporarily to their village in Sangli following the March 23, 2020 lockdown. He and his cousin would visit the market every week to buy supplies. In April day they were stopped by a constable despite wearing a handkerchief, which according to the advocate was permitted as per local Collector’s order.
During the hearing, advocate’s counsels - Sudeep Pasbola and Karl Rustomkhan - urged quashing of the FIR.
Additional public prosecutor Jayesh Yagnik told the court that they will forward the FIR to the committee within a week.
The HC has asked the committee to look into the FIR and take an appropriate decision expeditiously and kept the matter for hearing on November 30.
