In a major judicial development, the Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has imposed a fine of Rs. 5 lakh on senior IPS officer Mr. Mayank Awasthi (2012-batch IPS Officer), currently serving as Deputy Inspector General (DIG) in Bhopal, for deliberately obstructing an investigation and misleading the Trial Court in connection with a murder case during his tenure as Superintendent of Police (SP), Datia.
The High Court observed that Mr. Awasthi deliberately withheld crucial records, including call details and mobile location data, that were essential to the investigation. Notably, a directive issued by the Trial Court on September 7, 2018, had ordered the preservation of this data, which Mr. Awasthi received by September 17, 2018, but failed to disclose.
The court has directed a departmental inquiry to be initiated against the officer and has warned that failure to deposit the fine within a month will result in recovery proceedings and the registration of a separate contempt of court case.
The order relates to a murder case in which Manvendra Singh is facing trial under IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 307, 336, and 302 for the murder of Kailash and attempted murder of the complainant. An application filed in August 2018 claimed the incident occurred in Datia on September 24, 2017, but evidence indicated that the victims were in Amayan, Bhind at the time. The Investigating Officer allegedly manipulated jurisdictional details, presenting a false location for the incident and suppressing the call data that could prove otherwise.
The High Court has asked the present SP of Datia to submit all records related to call detail records (CDRs) and mobile location data within 10 days from April 16, 2025. A charge sheet against Mr. Awasthi must also be prepared, and the Director General of Police (DGP) has been instructed to inform the court about the progress of the inquiry by May 20, 2025.
In a stern remark, the court stated it is up to the DGP to determine whether such officers should continue in the police service, citing Mr. Awasthi’s actions as potentially aimed at protecting either the accused or the complainant. The court called for a detailed inquiry to uncover the officer’s motives, highlighting concerns of misconduct and potential breach of justice. The case remains under intense judicial scrutiny.
