The blog post highlights critical procedural gaps in the investigation of NCR No. 104/2024 at Police Station Vindhyachal^. These gaps illustrate how Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima remains a central concern in this case. Here are the key takeaways:

1. Deliberate Evidence Suppression (Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima)

• The police admitted to ignoring a hospital X-ray report that confirmed a fracture.
• They used the absence of a “supplementary report” as a technical excuse to exclude this medical evidence.
• By omitting the fracture, the police downgraded the crime from Grievous Hurt to Simple Hurt.

2. Contradictory Official Records

• General Diary records show the physical arrest of Pramod Kumar Kushwaha at 15:30 hours.
• However, the police filed the official judicial report (Challani) against a different person, Mithlesh Maurya.
• This identity shift creates a “cryptic” and inconsistent legal trail for the court.

3. Biased Selection of Accused

• The police excluded Saroja Devi from the final chargesheet.
• They justified her exclusion because her name did not appear in the initial NCR.
• This decision ignored evidence or mentions of her involvement that surfaced during the actual investigation.

4. Strategic Use of RTI for Accountability

• The victim used RTI requests (like SPMZR/R/2026/60079 and DNMZP/R/2026/60007) to uncover these hidden gaps.
• A targeted “Yes or No” inquiry to the District Court is underway. It aims to prove if the police physically withheld the X-ray from the Judge.

5. Judicial Remedies for Victims

• The victim is not helpless and can challenge police “discretion” through the court.
• Under Section 193(9) of the BNSS, a Magistrate has the power to order a Further Investigation to include suppressed evidence.

Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima: How Police Procedural Gaps Undermine Victims

The path from crime to punishment should be a straight line. However, for many victims, “cryptic” police tactics obstruct this journey. A case involving NCR No. 104/2024 at Police Station Vindhyachal, Mirzapur, highlights how specific irregularities systematically weaken a victim’s legal standing. In essence, this is a classic illustration of justice denied cryptically in Mahima’s situation.

---

1. Medical Evidence Suppression: Lowering the Offense (Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima)

Accurate injury reporting is the foundation of a criminal case. In this matter, the official record contradicts the physical reality of the assault^. As we see here, Mahima had justice denied cryptically due to flaws in medical documentation.

• The Missing Fracture: An X-ray from Tej Bahadur Sapru Hospital confirmed a fracture. However, the police excluded it from the chargesheet.
• The Bureaucratic Excuse: The Investigating Officer (IO) claimed they ignored the fracture. They did so because the doctor failed to write a “supplementary report”.
• Legal Failure: Section 193 of the BNSS requires police to submit all medical evidence to the court. By labeling the injury as “Simple Hurt,” the police reduce the potential punishment for the attackers.

---

2. Identity Shifts: Arrests vs. Court Records

Transparency in detention protects the legal process. However, these records show a confusing “shell game” regarding who the police actually caught. This situation is yet another example of the cryptic denial of justice to Mahima.

• The Physical Detention: General Diary (GD) records show the police arrested Pramod Kumar Kushwaha at 15:30 hours.
• The Judicial Switch: Despite that arrest, the police filed the official court report (Challani) against a different man, Mithlesh Maurya.
• The Result: These contradictory files prevent the Magistrate from seeing a clear history of the case.

---

3. Choosing the Accused: Arbitrary Exclusions

Police must investigate all suspects. They do not have the right to ignore individuals the victim identifies without a clear legal reason^. Clearly, regarding Mahima, police procedural gaps serve to deny justice cryptically.

• The Case of Saroja Devi: The victim named Saroja Devi during the investigation. However, the police left her out of the final chargesheet.
• The Technicality: The police argued her name was missing from the first NCR report.
• The Flaw: This approach ignores evidence that surfaces during the actual investigation.

---

4. RTI: The Victim’s Shield

When the police hide evidence, the victim must become the investigator. RTI (Right to Information) exposes these hidden gaps. As a result, Mahima is forced to confront the cryptic mechanisms by which justice is denied.

• Active Files: The victim filed multiple requests, including SPMZR/R/2026/60079 and DNMZP/R/2026/60007, to track the missing documents.
• Exposing the Truth: A specific “Yes or No” request to the Court CPIO will provide proof. It will show if the police physically handed the X-ray to the Judge.

---

Conclusion: Taking Control of the Case (Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima)

The victim is a vital stakeholder in the justice system. When police tactics remain “cryptic,” victims must use judicial tools like Protest Petitions. Section 193(9) of the BNSS allows a Judge to force a “Further Investigation.” This can bring suppressed evidence back into the light^. Ultimately, only by challenging instances where justice has been denied cryptically to Mahima can victims hope for a fair outcome.

Based on the documents and filing records, here are the application identifiers, contact details, and web links for the concerned public authorities involved in your case:

1. Police Department (Superintendent of Police, Mirzapur) (Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima)

This authority handled your initial RTI and the subsequent First Appeal regarding the investigation of NCR No. 104/2024.

• RTI Registration Number: SPMZR/R/2026/60079
• First Appeal Number: SPMZR/A/2026/60018
• Public Information Officer (PIO): Manish Kumar Mishra (ASP Operation)
• PIO Mobile: 9473567333
• PIO Email: aspopmzp@gmail.com
• First Appellate Authority (FAA): Aparna Rajat Kaushik (SP Mirzapur)
• FAA Email: spmzr-up@nic.in
• Nodal Officer Email: addlspopmzr@gmail.com
• Web Link: UP Police RTI Portal

---

2. Judicial Authority (District Court Mirzapur)(Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima)

This is the authority where you have filed the specific inquiry. This inquiry is about the suppression of the fracture report in the judicial file.

• RTI Registration Number: DNMZP/R/2026/60007
• Online Reference Number: CPAGLLGAU4
• Nodal Officer Telephone: 7355729785
• Nodal Officer Email: dcmir@allahabadhighcourt.in
• Web Link: UP District Court RTI Portal

---

3. Medical Authority (CHC Vindhyachal)(Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima)

This is the facility where the initial medical examination was conducted and the disputed report was issued.

• Concerned Officer: Medical Officer In-Charge (MOIC), CHC Vindhyachal
• Report Reference: Medical examination dated 14/09/2024 at 11:25 AM
• Address: Community Health Centre, Vindhyachal, Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh

---

4. Associated Hospital (Tej Bahadur Sapru Hospital)(Justice Denied Cryptically to Mahima)

This facility issued the X-ray report confirming the fracture, which the police allegedly concealed from the court.

• Document Reference: X-ray report dated 20/09/2024
• Address: Tej Bahadur Sapru (Beli) Hospital, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh.

---

Would you like me to draft a follow-up email to the Nodal Officer at the District Court? This will help ensure your application is being processed.