Innocence converts into criminality when justice is either delayed or that is denied because of the tactics played with money power or favouritism. One day, Mt.X puts up a complaint in a nearby police station against Mr.Y, an influential person of the area for a petty scuffle on the matter of some outstanding on account of some business transactions. Mr.Y asks the Police officer posted at that station, not to take on record the complaint for any action and contacts a senior Police Officer to teach a lesson to Mr.X as to how dare he did put up the complaint. The senior officer after accepting some gratification, advises Mr.Y to file a complaint in other police station against Mr.X hiding some basic facts of the commercial relationship. There, Mr.Y files his complaint accordingly and a case is registered against Mr.X and his parents. Mr.X and his father are put in jail. The judiciary works on the FIR filed by Mr.Y on misleading grounds and the investigation report filed by the biased IO, and denies bail to the accused persons. When the hidden facts are brought to the knowledge of the higher Officers, the matter is further investigated and it is found that the case was created on false grounds. But now, an officer of the judiciary does not take into account the report of the second IO because he has already taken cognizance on the report of the first IO. But the judicial procedure does not provide as such. The persons accused in the case filed by Mr.Y are still suffering. Why so? Is it a fault of the system and is it faulty interpretation of the provisions made in the system? Should the officer of judiciary not take into account the both reports for proceeding ahead in the case?
