Colonel assault case: Punjab and Haryana HC transfers probe to CBI; pulls up Chandigarh Police
Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj directed Chandigarh Superintendent of Police Manjeet Sheoran, who was heading a special investigation team, to hand over the complete record of the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation.
Chandigarh, Jul 16 (PTI) The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday transferred the investigation into the alleged assault of a colonel by Punjab Police personnel to the CBI and also pulled up the Chandigarh Police for trying to create 'loopholes' and 'craters' in the probe.
The petitioner in its fresh plea sought an independent probe preferably by the CBI into the matter, said his lawyer Deepinder Singh Virk.
On April 3, the high court marked the probe into the assault case to the Chandigarh Police and directed it to complete the investigation within four months.
'This Court had entrusted the investigation out of the State of Punjab so as to ensure an impartial investigation but the Court finds no change in the situation. Without completing the investigation, when the investigating agency has already deleted the offence under Section 109 BNS (Section 307 IPC), approach of the investigating agency is clear enough,' the court said in its order.
Stating that a free and fair investigation is the backbone of every criminal trial, the court observed that if the investigation itself is compromised, the trial before the court looses its sanctity. The supremacy of the law is independent of the status of the accused, it noted.
'From the overwhelming circumstances of the case, the court is convinced that the investigating agency is not only trying to create loopholes in the investigation, but trying to make craters in the investigation so as to ensure that once the chargesheet is filed before the court, the case of the prosecution should hardly be able to crawl in the court,' Justice Bhardwaj said.
The court said the purpose of the investigation is to bring out the truth and not to suppress the same.
'The success of the investigating agency is in collecting the best of the evidence and present the same before the court and not to fabricate the evidence and submit the hopeless chargesheet before the court so as to ensure that the court is left with no other option then to grant the benefit of doubt to the accused,' said the order.
A free and fair investigation is part of the Constitution enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, it said.
'Weighing the facts and circumstances of the present case on the anvil of law settled, this court finds that there are no prospects of free and fair investigation in the case by the Investigating Agency of UT, Chandigarh,' it said.
Justice Bhardwaj also quoted Lord Hewart, the then Chief Justice of England in the case of Rex vs. Sussex Justices, (1924), who laid down the dictum, 'Justice must not only be done, but must also be seem to be done'.
'In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the court cannot be a mute spectator to the conduct of the investigating agency in conducting the investigation in a tainted manner,' the court said, adding that 'hence, the investigation of the case is withdrawn from UT, Chandigarh with immediate effect.
Investigation of the case is handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation, it said.
The court stated that so far progress in the investigation is concerned, except saying that the investigation is in progress, there is no material to convince the court that the investigation is being carried out in a free and fair manner.
'Time limit of four months granted by this court is almost over. Without concluding the investigation, the investigating agency has already made up its mind to delete the offence under Section 109 BNS, which substantiate the apprehension of the petitioner that the investigating agency is proceeding in a tainted manner to give benefit to the accused,' it observed.
Needless to say that other offences in the FIR are also non-bailable, but the investigating agency has no answer regarding its conduct in not proceeding against the accused, said the court.
'The only answer given to the court is that all the accused are not traceable. The court cannot lose the sight that all the accused are serving police officials. The court is conscious of the fact that how and in what manner a probe is to be conducted, would lie in the domain of the investigating agency.
'However, to ensure a free and fair investigation, lies within the domain of the court,' it said.
Appearing for the Chandigarh Police, counsel Manish Bansal opposed the petitioner's submissions and brought to the attention of the court about steps taken in conducting the probe.
Bansal submitted that raids were conducted to arrest Ronnie Singh, one of the accused, after dismissal of his anticipatory bail but he could not be apprehended.
The petitioner submitted that the Chandigarh Police had 'failed' to conduct a free and fair investigation in the case.
Meanwhile, speaking to the media, Bath's wife Jasvinder Kaur Bath said she was happy over the court direction for giving the probe to the CBI.
She said she has been fighting for justice. 'I have been fighting for justice for 120 days. I am exhausted but I will not give up until they (accused Punjab police personnel) get punishment,' said Kaur after the hearing.
Kaur accused the Chandigarh Police of its inaction in the matter, alleging that the UT police came under pressure of the Punjab Police.
She further alleged that the Chandigarh Police was trying to drop the non-bailable charges in the matter instead of arresting the accused.
She said the court during the hearing reprimanded the Chandigarh Police for not carrying out a fair probe.
Colonel Bath had accused 12 Punjab Police personnel of assaulting him and his son over the parking dispute and sought a transfer of the probe to an independent agency, preferably the CBI.
He alleged that the assailants — four inspector-rank officers of the Punjab Police and their armed subordinates — attacked him and his son without provocation, snatched his ID card and mobile phone, and threatened him with a 'fake encounter', all in public view and under CCTV camera coverage.
Before the probe was handed over to the Chandigarh Police, Bath had alleged that a fair investigation was impossible under the Punjab Police. PTI CHS KVK KVK
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
8 minutes ago
- Hans India
2 held in hit-and-run case after shootout with police in Deoria
Deoria: Two men were arrested following a police encounter in connection with a hit-and-run incident that killed an e-rickshaw driver and injured four others in Uttar Pradesh's Deoria district, officials said. According to Circle Officer (Salempur) Deepak Shukla, the incident occurred near Baruwadih village in the Bariyarpur police station area, where a pickup truck allegedly rammed into an e-rickshaw with the intent to kill. The collision led to the death of the e-rickshaw driver on the spot and left four passengers injured. The accused have been identified as Khurshid Shah of Kushinagar district, and Munab Ali of Gopalganj district in Bihar, Shukla said. Following the incident, Bariyarpur police reached the scene, arrested the two suspects, and brought them to the local police station where a case under BNS sections 103 (murder) and 109 (attempt to murder) was registered. During a police-led site inspection of the vehicle used in the crime, the accused late Thursday night allegedly attempted to escape by pulling out country-made pistols hidden inside the pickup truck and opening fire on the police team. In retaliatory fire by the police, both suspects sustained bullet injuries to their legs, the officer said. They were immediately taken to the district hospital in Deoria for treatment. Authorities said further legal proceedings are underway, he added.
Indian Express
8 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Former SSP, DSP among 5 Punjab cops convicted of killing 7 in 1993 fake encounter
A CBI court in Mohali Friday convicted five retired Punjab Police officers, including then Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) and Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP), in a case pertaining to two alleged fake encounters in 1993 in which seven men of Tarn Taran's Rani Vallah village were gunned down. Among the victims were four Special Police Officers (SPOs). The court of Special Judge Baljinder Singh Sra convicted former SSP Bhupinderjit Singh, DSP Davinder Singh, Inspector Suba Singh, ASIs Gulbarg Singh and Raghbir Singh, all retired, of criminal conspiracy, murder, destruction of evidence, and fabrication of records under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, and 218 of the Indian Penal Code. All five were taken into custody following the verdict. Five other accused police officers during the course of the trial while one turned prosecution witness. The quantum of sentence will be pronounced on Monday. The case stems from two separate alleged fake encounters in June and July 1993, in which seven men were picked up by the police, illegally detained, tortured, and later shown as killed in staged encounters. According to the CBI, five of the seven victims belonged to Dalit communities. According to investigation carried out by the CBI, the victims were initially picked up in connection with a robbery case in village Sangatpura. However, they were later declared as militants and shown to have been killed in armed encounters with the police. Their bodies were not returned, nor were families informed. As per the CBI, on the morning of June 27, 1993, Inspector Gurdev Singh — then SHO of Sarhali police station — led a police team that picked SPOs Shinder Singh, Desa Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Balkar Singh alias Bobby, and another person Daljit Singh — all residents of Rani Vallah — from the residence of a government contractor in the presence of family members. They were taken to PS Sarhali, where they were allegedly tortured to confess to the robbery. Subsequently, on July 2, 1993, Sarhali police filed an FIR (No. 61/93) claiming that three SPOs — Shinder Singh, Desa Singh, and Sukhdev Singh — had absconded with government-issued arms. On July 12, police claimed that while escorting one Mangal Singh to village Gharka for recovery in a dacoity case, their party was attacked by militants. In the alleged crossfire, Mangal Singh and three others — Desa Singh, Shinder Singh, and Balkar Singh — were shown as killed. Police recovered arms and ammunition from the scene and registered another FIR (No. 72/93) at Sarhali police station. The forensic analysis, however, revealed inconsistencies. The Central Forensic Science Laboratory found that the bullet casings collected at the scene did not match the weapons allegedly recovered from the deceased. Post-mortem examination reports also indicated that the victims had been tortured prior to death. Despite being identified by two ASIs, the bodies were cremated as 'unclaimed' and 'unidentified.' In a separate incident, the CBI found that another victim from the earlier group, Sukhdev Singh, had been handed over to Verowal police. Around the same time, police abducted Sarabjit Singh from village Hansawala and Harwinder Singh from Kaithal, Haryana. All three were shown as killed in another encounter on July 28, 1993, allegedly involving Verowal police officers. An FIR (No. 44/93) was registered at Verowal police station, and police documented the recovery of a bolt-action rifle, a 12-bore gun, and a .303 rifle. The CBI found these documents to be fabricated to justify the killings. The case was originally brought to light as part of the broader investigation into mass cremations of unclaimed bodies in Punjab during the militancy era, spearheaded by human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra. Following Supreme Court orders on December 12, 1996, the CBI began its inquiry. The central agency registered a regular case in 1999 based on the complaint of Narinder Kaur, wife of SPO Shinder Singh. She alleged that that her husband was killed in a fake encounter and cremated as an unidentified person. The CBI filed a chargesheet in 2002 against 11 accused officers. However, trial proceedings were delayed due to legal stays between 2010 and 2021. During this period, five of the accused died. Out of 67 witnesses cited by the CBI, 36 died away during the prolonged trial, and only 28 were able to testify. Sarabjit Singh Verka, counsel for the victim families, welcomed the court's decision and noted that justice had been delayed but ultimately delivered. Gurmeet Kaur, widow of SPO Sukhdev Singh, said, 'I was pregnant when my husband was killed. We didn't even know he had died until 15 days later. He left home for duty and never returned. I raised my children doing domestic work. We sold off everything we owned to fight this case. Now, after 32 years, justice has finally been served. She urged the Punjab government to grant her children jobs and compensation. 'Now that the court has declared my husband innocent, I hope the government recognizes our suffering,' she said. Nishan Singh, son of another victim, said, 'We fought the case in high court, the Supreme Court and later in the CBI court. We are hopeful that justice will be done with strict punishment to the guilty and compensation for the affected families so that we can rebuild our lives.'
The Hindu
8 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Madras HC restrains Savukku Shankar from defaming ADGP Davidson Devasirvatham in Sivaganga custodial death case
The Madras High Court has restrained YouTuber 'Savukku' Shankar alias A. Shankar from making defamatory allegations, insinuations or imputations against Additional Director General of Police (Law and Order) S. Davidson Devasirvatham in relation to the alleged custodial death of B. Ajith Kumar of Sivaganga district in June this year. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu granted the interim injunction for a period of four weeks pursuant to a defamation suit filed by the ADGP (L&O) accusing the YouTuber of presenting concocted tales woven out of unverified gossip, with a tone of certainty, in order to mislead the people at large and create suspicion and hostility. The judge agreed with senior counsel P.H. Arvindh Pandian, representing the ADGP, that the derogatory and defamatory manner in which the statements had been made would prima facie affect the reputation of his client holding high office and that Article 19(2) of the Constitution protects a citizen from being defamed. In an exhaustive affidavit filed in support of his injunction application, Mr. Devasirvatham recalled his professional accomplishments since he joined the Indian Police Service (IPS) in 1995 and said that the YouTuber had, however, exhibited a longstanding pattern of targeting him with false and malicious allegations. The ADGP said that the YouTuber had in July 2022 launched a targeted smear campaign linking him with the fake passport scam. The online slander extended to repeated demands for his suspension and removal from service and the defamatory outbursts quietened only after the Madras High Court gave a clean chit to him. Though the reputational damage caused due to that campaign, spearheaded by the YouTuber directly and also through his proxy Varaaki, remained unremedied, 'I chose not to respond publicly and continued to discharge my official duties with discipline and commitment,' the ADGP said. However, after the recent Sivaganga custodial death of a temple security guard, the YouTuber had once again taken to the social media to level a series of grave and unfounded allegations against him, the ADGP complained and said that a completely false narrative had been constructed linking him with the death. 'The statements are entirely false, wholly unverified and manufactured without any basis. However, they were presented by the first respondent with a tone of authority and a pretense of insider knowledge thereby misleading the public into believing that they are grounded in official sources or confidential information,' the ADGP said. He went on to state: 'The truth, however, is that the first respondent possesses no personal knowledge of any such instructions, has no access to official communications, and is utterly devoid of evidence to support these reckless and defamatory allegations.' Claiming that the intention of the YouTuber was to deliberately sow doubts in the minds of the public, the ADGP said, 'these falsehoods are pushed by the first respondent with sensationalism, using provocative and conspiratorial language to stir public emotion and tarnish my name.' Mr. Devasirvatham said, the insidious allegations were amplified by other social media influencers leading to an orchestrated wave of repetition across digital platforms. 'What started as one person's false and harmful claim quickly grew into a digital echo chamber where repeating the lie made it seem like a fact,' he lamented. Apart from praying for an interim injunction specifically against the YouTuber, the ADGP also sought a John Doe/Ashok Kumar order (an order passed against unknown people) against all those unidentified individuals indulging in a malicious campaign against him in the digital space. 'Unlike accredited journalists governed by professional ethics, institutional oversight and legal consequences for irresponsible reporting; the respondents herein are often self-styled 'commentators' or 'digital influencers' who exploit the viral mechanics of platforms such as YouTube, X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook to spread scandalous narratives solely for sensationalism and viewership. Their content is unfiltered, unverified and unaccountable and crafted not with a sense of public duty but with the sole aim of gaining clicks, followers, or political mileage,' he said.
