The Rajasthan High Court has expressed dissatisfaction with the manner in which an investigation is being conducted into a complaint filed by an advocate against police personnel, observing that several crucial investigative steps were left incomplete. While declining to shift the investigation to another agency at this stage, the Court directed the police to strengthen the probe, preserve evidence, and ensure complete fairness throughout the process.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Bhim Singh Meena before the Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court. The petitioner alleged that certain police personnel abused and assaulted him and claimed that a breath analyser report against him had been fabricated. According to his submissions, he had visited a restaurant with friends for dinner, and the presence of independent witnesses at the restaurant could have verified his version. He also argued that despite filing the FIR, no impartial witnesses had been examined and his request for medical examination of the concerned police personnel to determine intoxication had not been acted upon.
The State, however, informed the Court that the Investigating Officer was personally present with the case diary and assured that a fair and impartial investigation was underway and that legal action would be taken against anyone found responsible during the investigation.
Court's Observations
After examining the case diary and the available material, Justice Anil Kumar Upman noted that the Court was, at this stage, not satisfied with the progress of the investigation.
The bench observed, “This Court is, prima facie, not satisfied with the investigation conducted so far,” pointing out that despite the petitioner's written request, no medical examination had been conducted to determine whether the accused police personnel were under the influence of alcohol.
The Court also noted that statements of independent witnesses had not been recorded even though CCTV footage from the restaurant had already been seized. It remarked that the investigating officer ought to have recorded the statements of the restaurant owner, employees and customers present at the relevant time.
At the same time, the Court did not accept the petitioner's contention that the present Investigating Officer could not conduct an impartial inquiry merely because of alleged subordination to the accused officials. The Court noted that the investigation was presently being handled by the ACP, Malviya Nagar, after having earlier been entrusted to another ACP.
Court's Decision
The High Court directed the Investigating Officer to explain why medical tests of the accused police personnel had not been conducted and why statements of independent witnesses were not recorded. It further ordered the officer to collect all relevant oral and documentary evidence, preserve and obtain CCTV footage from the surrounding area, and conduct the investigation independently without external influence.
The Court also directed the Commissioner of Police to transfer the accused police personnel from Pratap Nagar Police Station during the pendency of the investigation and to personally monitor the probe to ensure that it remains fair, transparent and impartial.
The matter has been listed after two weeks, with the Court making it clear that further orders may be passed depending on the progress of the investigation.
Case Details
Case Title: Bhim Singh Meena v. State of Rajasthan
Case Number: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4931/2026
Judge: Justice Anil Kumar Upman
Decision Date: 29 July 2026
