<p>The direction was passed by a division bench of Justices B H Marlapalle and U D Salvi, while hearing a petition filed by social activist Aminuddin Saeed, seeking action against Assistant Police Inspector Balasaheb Khade, after Saeed brought forward a recorded conversation between him and the officer seeking financial favours to settle a rape case.<br /><br />According to police, Khade, who owned two mobile phones, had made the call to Saeed from someone else's phone.<br /><br />"This instance calls for the commissioner of police to direct all the police officers in his force to furnish details of mobile phones they are using. If any officer is found using a phone, the details of which, have not been provided earlier, then he should face action," the court ordered.<br /><br />"Why does an assistant sub inspector need two phones? What is happening with Bombay police? At one point of time, Bombay police was number one in the world," Justice Marlapalle remarked.<br /><br />The court also came down heavily on the Kalina Forensic Laboratory (FSL), after Saeed's lawyer Pradeep Havnur said that the FSL is yet to examine the conversation tapes.<br />"What is the FSL doing? It should be closed down. It has become a liability now. This is not acceptable...absolutely ridiculous," Justice Marlapalle said.<br /><br />The court has directed the Secretary of state, Home department, and the lab in-charge, to remain present before it on June 22.<br /><br />In February 2010, Saeed's petition stated that his friend Umesh Reshamwala, who suffers from polio, sought his help, saying he was being threatened by a woman to book him for an offence of rape, if he did not buy her a house and a car.<br /><br />However, Saeed contended that when he approached the police on Reshamwala's behalf, Khade allegedly demanded Rs 2 lakh from him.</p>
<p>The direction was passed by a division bench of Justices B H Marlapalle and U D Salvi, while hearing a petition filed by social activist Aminuddin Saeed, seeking action against Assistant Police Inspector Balasaheb Khade, after Saeed brought forward a recorded conversation between him and the officer seeking financial favours to settle a rape case.<br /><br />According to police, Khade, who owned two mobile phones, had made the call to Saeed from someone else's phone.<br /><br />"This instance calls for the commissioner of police to direct all the police officers in his force to furnish details of mobile phones they are using. If any officer is found using a phone, the details of which, have not been provided earlier, then he should face action," the court ordered.<br /><br />"Why does an assistant sub inspector need two phones? What is happening with Bombay police? At one point of time, Bombay police was number one in the world," Justice Marlapalle remarked.<br /><br />The court also came down heavily on the Kalina Forensic Laboratory (FSL), after Saeed's lawyer Pradeep Havnur said that the FSL is yet to examine the conversation tapes.<br />"What is the FSL doing? It should be closed down. It has become a liability now. This is not acceptable...absolutely ridiculous," Justice Marlapalle said.<br /><br />The court has directed the Secretary of state, Home department, and the lab in-charge, to remain present before it on June 22.<br /><br />In February 2010, Saeed's petition stated that his friend Umesh Reshamwala, who suffers from polio, sought his help, saying he was being threatened by a woman to book him for an offence of rape, if he did not buy her a house and a car.<br /><br />However, Saeed contended that when he approached the police on Reshamwala's behalf, Khade allegedly demanded Rs 2 lakh from him.</p>