The Karnataka High Court
Credit: DH Photo
Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has acquitted 30 people in a 2011 criminal case relating to a violent protest at Toyota Techno Park in Bidadi.
Justice H P Sandesh directed the Director General and Inspector General of Police (DG&IGP) to initiate action against the investigating officer Vijayakumar and submit a progress report.
The incident had taken place on the night of March 19, 2011, when certain employees of Toyota allegedly formed an unlawful assembly and attacked the management staff of Stanzen Toyotetsu India Pvt Ltd on the Toyota premises in Bidadi.
In January 2019, a Ramanagar court convicted them all under the Probation of Offenders Act. The employees moved the high court after the sessions court upheld their conviction in February 2020.
Justice Sandesh noted that there were lapses on the part of the investigating officer in the entire incident. The court said that though the incident took place at about 10.30 pm and the police officer reached the spot within 45 minutes and visited it twice later, he did not register the complaint for cognisable offence.
The FIR reached the court two days after the incident without any explanation, even though the officer was present there for nearly 19 hours.
"The proceedings initiated by the IO, is hit by Section 162 and having knowledge about everything that a cognisable offence had taken place, even he did not choose to record the statement of any of the witnesses, either the injured witnesses or persons who have witnessed the incident, but only acted upon after the deliberation and pre-consultation. That too, complaint is received at the instance of the management as admitted and then registered the case. The complaint was given by one of the accused the previous day itself and the same is registered after the registration of case of the management,” Justice Sandesh said.
The court further acquitted all 30 employees observing that there was no legal evidence before the trial court to convict them.
Even witnesses have not been spoken to at the first instance by any of the injured persons that the accused persons have assaulted them, but only there was an improvement in the evidence, the court said.