Mobile theft victim fought police for four years:Vidisha trader claims cops ignored CCTV evidence, registered FIR after 9 months

What began as the theft of a ₹20,000 mobile phone turned into a four-year legal and administrative battle for electronics trader Rajendra Ahirwar, who alleges that despite submitting CCTV footage on the day of the incident, police delayed registering an FIR and failed to take timely action. The mobile phone, stolen from his shop in October 2022, was eventually recovered from Karnataka only after a fresh review of the case by a new Station House Officer. The theft was captured on CCTV Rajendra Ahirwar, an electronics businessman living near Khari Phatak in Vidisha, said his mobile phone, worth around ₹20,000 was stolen from his shop on October 12, 2022. According to him, three young girls entered the store while he was attending to customers. Moments later, he noticed that the phone that was on the counter was missing. CCTV footage allegedly showed one of the girls picking up the device and leaving with it. Rajendra submitted the footage to the Civil Lines police station the same day, expecting swift action. However, he claims the police accepted his application but did not immediately register an FIR or recover the phone. Repeated appeals failed to yield results Believing that the CCTV evidence would ensure a prompt investigation, Rajendra continued approaching the police station and the Superintendent of Police’s office. He says he was repeatedly assured that action would be taken, but no substantial progress was made. Frustrated by the inaction, he sought information under the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Delivery Guarantee Act, 2010, asking why no criminal case had been registered despite CCTV evidence, whether efforts had been made to identify the accused, the status of mobile tracking, and the reasons behind the delay. When no response was received within the stipulated time, he filed a first appeal on June 2, 2023. Watch the CCTV footage of the incident Location found in Karnataka, but questions remained unanswered On July 18, 2023, authorities informed Rajendra that technical investigation had traced the mobile phone to Karnataka and that the device was active. However, he says the response failed to address his core questions regarding the delayed registration of the case and the lack of timely action against the suspects. Penalty imposed on the then-SHO Rajendra subsequently invoked both the Right to Information framework and the Public Service Guarantee law. According to him, the then Station House Officer was fined ₹5,000 for failing to provide the requested information and was also directed to pay a penalty of ₹250 per day until compliance. He adds that he received compensation for the inconvenience and travel involved in pursuing the matter. FIR registered 9 months after the theft Rajendra alleges that although police accepted his complaint soon after the theft, an FIR was registered only on July 22, 2023—around nine months later and only after persistent follow-ups and pressure from various forums. He maintains that despite repeatedly seeking explanations for the delay, he never received a satisfactory response. “No translator available,” police allegedly told complainant Rajendra claims that during the investigation, he received unusual explanations from officials. According to him, one Station House Officer said that since the phone had been traced to Karnataka, differences in language were creating difficulties because no translator was available. Rajendra further alleges that he was once told that if he wanted the phone recovered quickly, he should bear the travel expenses for the team. Complaints reached multiple authorities Determined to pursue the matter, Rajendra submitted complaints to the Superintendent of Police, Inspector General, Deputy Inspector General, the Human Rights Commission, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Commission, elected representatives, and ministers. While he says assurances of action were repeatedly given, the phone remained unrecovered for years. Case closure triggered fresh protest Earlier this year, Rajendra learned that the case had reportedly been closed. On March 30, 2026, he filed another application seeking to have the closure revoked and the investigation reopened. He questioned how the matter could be closed when the mobile phone’s location had already been identified. New SHO reopened the investigation Rajendra says that after Rajpal Singh Jadaun assumed charge as the Civil Lines Station House Officer, the old records and technical evidence were reviewed. According to the complainant, while the case had seen little progress for years, the renewed investigation led to the recovery of the mobile phone from Karnataka within a matter of days. He alleges, however, that although the phone has been recovered, adequate action has still not been taken against the accused. “I’m only 10th pass, but I know my rights” Having worked in the electronics business for nearly 25 years, Rajendra says the struggle was about more than the value of the stolen device. “I am only a 10th pass, but I know my rights. Had I given up midway, the case might have been closed forever,” he said, adding that the episode raises broader concerns about accountability and whether ordinary citizens should have to wage prolonged battles even when clear evidence is available. Police version Civil Lines Station House Officer Rajpal Singh Jadaun said that a mobile theft case had been registered in 2023 and that the cyber team continued tracking the device through its location and technical evidence. He stated that the phone was recently traced to Karnataka, following which a police team recovered it. After completion of the court formalities, the recovered mobile phone will be handed over to the complainant.