The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court ruled that recording video inside a police station does not fall under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act, which pertains to spying. The decision came as the bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and SG Chapalgaonkar struck down charges under the Act filed against Mumbai police constable Santosh Athare.

The case, registered at Pathardi Police Station in Ahmednagar district, involved Athare and his brother Subhash. The police had invoked the Official Secrets Act, but the court noted that Section 2(8) of the Act defines “prohibited places,” and police stations are not included in that definition.

The court also clarified that Section 3, which deals with “penalties for spying”, does not apply to actions taken within a police station.

However, the court declined to quash other charges in the FIR, including those under Sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code.

The case arose after Subhash Athare stated in the complaint that three persons had illegally trespassed in their house on April 21, 2022, when no one except their mother was present.

Subhash had questioned why only a non-cognizable case was registered when trespassers allegedly assaulted their mother. The Athare brothers claimed that their complaint to higher authorities led to an FIR being filed against them by local police in retaliation.

Subhash had recorded the call and made a complaint to the Director General of Police. Athares lawyer AG Ambetkar argued that because of the complaint, with ulterior motive, the Pathardi police registered an FIR against Subhash and Santosh.

Additional Public Prosecutor NR Dayama opposed quashing of the plea and submitted that Subhash was unnecessarily doing videography and Santosh was threatening the Pathardi police personnel present in the station.

The court allowed part of their plea but left it to the trial court to determine if other charges should be pursued.