The Bombay High Court's Aurangabad bench has recently ruled that recording conversations within a police station does not constitute an offence under the Official Secrets Act. [Subhash Rambhau Athare and Anr v. State of Maharashtra and Anr]
Hence, the Court quashed charges of spying against two brothers from Pathardi ij Maharashtra though it declined to quash charges of criminal conspiracy against them under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
A Bench comprising Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice S G Chapalgaonkar noted that the relevant facts from the First Information Report (FIR) and witness statements indicated that the entire incident occurred in a police station.
The police had invoked the Official Secrets Act, 1923.
"Section 2 (8) of the said Act defines what is “prohibited place”. Police Station is not included in the said definition. Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 deals with “Penalties for spying”....Anything done in the police is absolutely not included in Section 3. Under such circumstance, ingredients of the said section are not at all attracted" the Court ruled, indicating that the charges under the Official Secrets Act were unfounded.
The FIR was filed on July 19, 2022 accusing brothers Subhash and Santosh Rambhau Athare of criminal conspiracy (Section 120B) and intimidation (Section 506) of the Indian Penal Code as well as violations under the Official Secrets Act. This stemmed from an incident in which Subhash recorded a conversation with a police officer.
The case followed an unfortunate incident on April 21, 2022 when three individuals allegedly trespassed into the Athare home and assaulted their mother.
Dissatisfied with the police handling of their complaint—registered as a non-cognizable offense—the Athare brothers sought answers.
On May 2, 2022, when Subhash confronted the Investigating Officer about the case, he recorded their conversation during which he was allegedly threatened to withdraw the complaint against the trespassers.
He was also allegedly threatened with potential charges under the Atrocities Act. Subsequently, he forwarded the recording to the Director General of Police, subsequent to which to which the current FIR was lodged against him.
The brothers' counsel argued that the FIR was retaliatory and based on concocted evidence, and therefore should be quashed.
Conversely, the prosecution contended that the recording amounted to intimidation of police personnel, particularly when Subhash is a police officer himself, which justified the charges against the brothers.
The Court carefully assessed the applicability of the Official Secrets Act, emphasizing that the definition of a "prohibited place" under Section 2(8) does not include police stations. It ultimately concluded that the charges under the Act lacked merit.
While acknowledging the serious nature of the allegations under the IPC, the Court deferred to the lower court to determine whether the evidence warranted further proceedings regarding conspiracy and criminal intimidation charges.
The Court eventually quashed the charges under the Official Secrets Act, while allowing the IPC charges to proceed. The case will now return to the Judicial Magistrate First Class in Pathardi for further examination.
Advocate AG Ambetkar appeared for Athare brothers.
Additional Public Prosecutor NR Dayama appeared for the State and police personnel.
[Read Order]