The constables, who have made the allegation while challenging their transfers before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), have also pointed out that no explanations were sought from them when the transfers were ordered.

Though the transfer orders have been signed by Deputy Commissioner of Police, P M Shegaonkar, the constables - Shrikant Chandrakant Ubale and Baburao Uttamrao Bodkhe - have singled out Assistant Commissioner of Police (Administration), Sudhir Dabhade for having allegedly misled Commissioner of Police, Shripad Kulkarni, on the background of the case. ``Dabhade is taking an undue interest in the whole investigations,'' the constables have stated in their application moved through advocate S B Talekar.

Dabhade and Shegaonkar have intheir affidavits before the tribunal denied having exerted undue pressure on the constables to protect any particular person, though they admit that the complaint from the woman, Fateema, wife of Saleh Chouse, was one of the reasons for their transfers.

Fateema, meanwhile, has approached the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court, with a writ petition claiming that she is being harassed by one of the constables, Bodkhe, who she has charged with concocting a case against her in connection with the theft case.

However Bodkhe, in his application states that it is no coincidence that Fateema's petition was filed on the same day (February 5) that he made his application before the MAT. ``It was ACP Dabhade who actually instigated her to file it,'' the constable has stated.

Bodkhe was, on at least two earlier instances, instrumental in arresting Saleh Chouse in connection with various cases booked against him. Chouse has 22 cases registered against him, nine of which are for crimes committed in Mumbai andPune.

Bodkhe, a recipient of more than 60 awards for making breakthroughs in various cases, has stated that considering the seriousness of Fateema's complaint against him, it was strange that Dabhade had not recorded it in writing. Moreover, neither the police diary nor the station diary, two meticulously maintained records with the police, make any mention of receiving any complaint from Fateema.

The petitioners' counsel, Talekar, has argued that the principles of natural justice have been violated as the constables were given no opportunity to explain their versions at a time when their transfers were being ordered following a complaint of serious nature. He also pointed out that the transfers could not have been routine since they had been ordered before the end of the constables' three-year term.

Citing various judgements, he said a transfer made on the basis of a complaint was virtually a punishment and this punishment was being forced upon the constables without hearing them, heargued.

Interestingly, Fateema too has a number of complaints registered against her under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, and 143, 147, 323, 504, 324 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. Copies of the first information reports against Fateema have been submitted before MAT Member V G Bamnodkar, who is hearing the case.