Click Here To Read LiveLaw Hindi- The First Hindi Legal News Website

Breaking: Erring Prosecutors and Investigating Officers must be proceeded against in case of unmerited acquittals and wrongful convictions; SC [Download the judgment]

The Supreme Court has come up with yet another landmark judgment in Criminal Law which is in the right direction of cleansing the criminal prosecution system of our country. The Apex Court was considering a Criminal Appeal by the State of Gujarat against acquittal of an accused person, who was originally awarded death penalty by the Trial Court.

The accused stood trial for rape and brutal murder of a six year old child.  The case began on filing a complaint  at  Navrangpura  Police  Station,  Ahmedabad, alleging the  kidnapping/abduction  of  a  six  year  old  girl  child  on 27.2.2003  by the accused enticing the child with a “gola”  (crushed  ice, with sweet flavoured syrup), and later she was  taken to  a   field and raped.  The child was  murdered  by inflicting injuries on her  head and other parts of the body with bricks and murderer took away the  “jhanjris” (anklets) worn by her, by chopping off her feet just  above  her  ankles. One of the most horrendous crime reported in the recent past.

The Trial Court relaying on circumstantial evidence awarded death penalty, which was later reversed by the High Court and acquitted the accused. The State appealed to the Supreme Court, but the Court through the present judgment acquitted the accused. While doing so, the Apex Court felt deep anguish and noticed the appalling standards of investigation. It went on to give far reaching directions which will have to be followed by the Police and prosecution agencies in the country. Notably, the SC has directed that a training programme be put in place within 6 months which would ensure that those who handle sensitive matters concerning investigation/prosecution are fully trained to handle the same. And thereupon, if any lapses are committed by them, they would not be able to feign innocence, and will be made liable to suffer departmental action for their lapses.

The judgment has been authored by Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, who heard the matter along with Justice C.K. Prasad.  The scathing observations of the Apex Court touch the conscience of the citizens and expose the inefficiency and failure of the concerned prosecution agencies in handling the investigation of the heinous crime. In the words of the Court, “He (accused) may be truly  innocent, or  he  may  have  succeeded  because  of  the  lapses  committed   by   the investigating/prosecuting teams”.  

Reacting to the judgment former Supreme Court Judge K T Thomas J. said; “as a trial lawyer on the criminal side for a period of 17 years and a trial sessions judge for a period of 8 years and as appellate judge in High Court and Supreme Court for a period nearly 18 years i am of the view that ‘unmerited acquittals’ are on account of inefficiency or lapse or even connivance on the part of the Public Prosecutor. A defective investigation can be7 corrected by Public Prosecutor utilising different provisions of Cr. PC and Evidence Act. No doubt Supreme Court has rightly pointed out to the authorities that erring Investigating Officers must be made answerable to the real culprits escaping from the criminal liability due to the lapses of Investigating Officer. To that extend I welcome the judgment.”

The relevant extracts of the judgment are reproduced as below:

“14.    We  have  given  our  thoughtful  consideration  to  the  submissions advanced at the hands of the learned counsel for the appellant,  which  have been duly noticed in paragraph 9 hereinabove.  It is also  relevant  for  us to record, that the learned counsel for the  appellant  did  not  advance  a single submission  in  addition  to  the  contentions  we  have  noticed  in paragraph 9 above.  The submissions advanced at the  hands  of  the  learned counsel for  the  appellant,  were  sought  to  be  supported  by  judgments rendered by this Court, all of which have been referred to in  paragraph  13 above.  The submissions advanced at the hands of  the  learned  counsel  for the appellant, based  on  each  of  the  judgments  cited,  have  also  been recorded by us in the said paragraph.  Having  considered  the  totality  of the facts and circumstances of  this  case,  specially  the  glaring  lapses committed in the investigation and prosecution  of  the  case  (recorded  in paragraph 11 of the instant judgment), as also the  inconsistencies  in  the evidence  produced  by  the  prosecution   (summarized   in   paragraph   12 hereinabove),  we  are  of  the  considered  view,  that  each  one  of  the submissions advanced at the hands of the learned counsel for  the  appellant is meritless.  For the circumstantial evidence produced by the  prosecution, primary reliance has been placed on the  statements  of  Bababhai  Naranbhai Solanki PW2, Naranbhai Manabhai Solanki PW5, and Dinesh Karshanbhai  Thakore PW6.  By demonstrating inconsistencies and infirmities in the statements  of the above witnesses, their statements have  also  been  rendered  suspicious and accordingly unreliable.  There is also a serious impression  of  fudging and padding at the hands of the agencies involved.  As  a  matter  of  fact, the  lack  of  truthfulness  of  the  statements  of  witnesses   has   been demonstrated by means of simple logic emerging  from  the  factual  position expressed through different prosecution witnesses (summarized in  paragraphs 11 and 12 above).  The evidence produced to  prove  the  charges,  has  been systematically  shattered,  thereby  demolishing  the  prosecution  version. More than all that, is the non production of evidence which the  prosecution has unjustifiably withheld, resulting in dashing all the States  efforts  to the  ground.   It  is  not  necessary  for  us  to   record   our   detailed determination on the submissions  advanced  at  the  hands  of  the  learned counsel for the appellant, for such reasons clearly emerge from the  factual position noticed in paragraphs 11 and 12 hereinabove.  Recording of  reasons all over again, would just be a  matter  of  repetition.   In  view  of  the above, we find  no  merit  in  this  appeal  and  the  same  is  accordingly dismissed.

15.    The  investigating  officials  and  the   prosecutors   involved   in presenting this case, have miserably failed  in  discharging  their  duties. They have been instrumental in denying to serve the cause of  justice.   The misery of the family of the  victim  Gomi  has  remained  unredressed.   The perpetrators of a horrendous crime, involving extremely ruthless and  savage treatment  to  the  victim,  have  remained  unpunished.   A  heartless  and merciless criminal, who has committed an extremely heinous crime,  has  gone scot-free.  He must be walking around in Ahmedabad, or some other  city/town in India, with his head held high.  A criminal on the  move.   Fearless  and fearsome.   Fearless  now,  because  he  could  not  be   administered   the punishment, he ought to have suffered.  And  fearsome,  on  account  of  his having remained unaffected by  the  brutal  crime  committed  by  him.   His actions now, know of no barriers.   He  could  be  expected  to  act  in  an unfathomable savage manner, uncomprehendable to a sane mind.

16.   As we discharge our responsibility in deciding  the  instant  criminal appeal, we proceed to apply principles of law, and  draw  inferences.   For, that is our job.  We are trained, not to be swayed by mercy  or  compassion. We are trained  to  adjudicate  without  taking  sides,  and  without  being mindful of the consequences.  We are required to adjudicate on the basis  of well drawn parameters.  We have done all that.   Despite  thereof,  we  feel crestfallen, heartbroken and sorrowful.  We could not  serve  the  cause  of justice, to an innocent child.   We  could  not  even  serve  the  cause  of justice, to her immediate family.  The members of the family  of  Gomi  must never have stopped cursing themselves, for not adequately  protecting  their child from a prowler, who had snatched  an  opportunity  to  brutalise  her,during their lapse in attentiveness.  And if the prosecution  version  about motive is correct, the crime was  committed  for  a  mere  consideration  of Rs.1,000/-.

17.   Every time there is an acquittal, the consequences are just the  same, as have been noticed hereinabove.  The  purpose  of  justice  has  not  been achieved.  There is also another side to be taken  into  consideration.   We have declared the accused-respondent innocent, by  upholding  the  order  of the High Court, giving him the benefit of doubt.  He may be truly  innocent, or  he  may  have  succeeded  because  of  the  lapses  committed   by   the investigating/prosecuting teams.  If he has escaped, despite  being  guilty, the investigating and the  prosecution  agencies  must  be  deemed  to  have seriously messed it all up.  And if the accused was  wrongfully  prosecuted, his  suffering  is  unfathomable.   Here   also,   the   investigating   and prosecuting agencies are blameworthy.6  It is  therefore  necessary,  not  to overlook even the hardship suffered by the accused, first during  the  trial of the case, and then at the appellate stages.  An innocent person does  not deserve to suffer the turmoil of a long drawn litigation,  spanning  over  a decade, or more.  The expenses incurred by an accused  in  his  defence  can dry up all his  financial  resources  –  ancestral  or  personal.   Criminal litigation could also ordinarily involve financial borrowings.   An  accused can be expected to be under a financial debt, by  the  time  his  ordeal  is over.

18.    Numerous  petitions  are  filed  before  this  Court,   praying   for anticipatory bail (under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal  Procedure)  at the behest of persons apprehending arrest, or for bail  (under  Section  439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) at the behest of  persons  already  under detention.  In a large number of such petitions, the main contention  is  of false implication.  Likewise, many petitions seeking  quashing  of  criminal proceeding (filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure)  come up for hearing day after day,  wherein  also,  the  main  contention  is  of fraudulent  entanglement/involvement.   In   matters   where   prayers   for anticipatory bail or for bail made under Sections 438 and  439  are  denied, or where a quashing  petition  filed  under  Section  482  of  the  Code  of Criminal Procedure is declined, the person  concerned  may  have  to  suffer periods of  incarceration  for  different  lengths  of  time.   They  suffer captivity and confinement most  of  the  times  (at  least  where  they  are accused of serious offences), 5till the culmination of their trial.  In  case of  their  conviction,  they  would  continue  in  confinement  during   the appellate stages also, and in matters which reach the  Supreme  Court,  till the disposal of  their  appeals  by  this  Court.   By  the  time  they  are acquitted at the appellate stage, they may  have  undergone  long  years  of custody.  When acquitted by this Court, they may have suffered  imprisonment of 10 years, or more.   When  they  are  acquitted  (by  the  trial  or  the appellate court), no one returns to them; what  was  wrongfully  taken  away from them.  The system responsible for the  administration  of  justice,  is responsible for having deprived them of   their  lives,  equivalent  to  the period of their detention.   It is  not  untrue,  that  for  all  the  wrong reasons, innocent persons are subjected to suffer the ignominy  of  criminal prosecution and to suffer shame  and  humiliation.   Just  like  it  is  the bounden duty of a court to serve the cause of  justice  to  the  victim,  so also, it is the bounden duty of a court to ensure that  an  innocent  person is not subjected to the rigours of criminal prosecution. 

19.   The situation referred to above needs to be remedied.   For  the  said purpose, adherence to a simple procedure  could  serve  the  objective.   We accordingly direct, that  on  the  completion  of  the  investigation  in  a criminal case, the prosecuting agency should  apply  its  independent  mind, and require all shortcomings to be  rectified,  if  necessary  by  requiring further investigation.   It  should  also  be  ensured,  that  the  evidence gathered  during  investigation  is  truly  and  faithfully   utilized,   by confirming that  all  relevant  witnesses  and  materials  for  proving  the charges are conscientiously presented during the  trial  of  a  case.   This would achieve two purposes.  Only persons against whom there  is  sufficient evidence, will have to  suffer  the  rigors  of  criminal  prosecution.   By following the above procedure, in most criminal prosecutions, the  concerned agencies will be able to successfully establish the guilt of the accused.

20.   Every acquittal should be understood  as  a  failure  of  the  justice delivery  system,  in  serving  the  cause  of  justice.   Likewise,   every acquittal should ordinarily lead to the inference, that an  innocent  person was wrongfully prosecuted.  It is  therefore,  essential  that  every  State should put in place a procedural mechanism,  which  would  ensure  that  the cause of justice is served, which would simultaneously ensure the  safeguard of interest of  those  who  are  innocent.   In  furtherance  of  the  above purpose, it is considered essential to direct the Home1 Department  of  every State, to examine all orders of acquittal and  to  record  reasons  for  the failure of each prosecution case.  A standing committee of  senior  officers of the police and prosecution departments, should be vested  with  aforesaid responsibility.  The consideration at the  hands  of  the  above  committee, should   be   utilized   for   crystalizing   mistakes   committed    during investigation, and/or prosecution, or both.  The Home  Department  of  every State Government will incorporate in its existing  training  programmes  for junior investigation/prosecution officials course- content  drawn  from  the above consideration.  The same  should  also  3constitute  course-content  of refresher  training   programmes,   for   senior   investigating/prosecuting officials.  The above responsibility for preparing training  programmes  for officials, should be  vested  in  the  same  committee  of  senior  officers referred to above.  Judgments like the one in hand (depicting more  than  10 glaring lapses in the investigation/prosecution of the  case),  and  similar other judgments, may also be added to the training programmes. The  course content will be reviewed by the above committee annually, on  the  basis  of fresh  inputs,  including  emerging  scientific  tools   of   investigation, judgments of Courts, and on the basis of 2experiences gained by the  standing committee while examining failures, in unsuccessful  prosecution  of  cases.

We further direct, that the above training programme be put in place  within 6 months. This would ensure that those persons who handle sensitive  matters concerning investigation/prosecution are fully trained to handle  the  same. Thereupon, if any lapses are committed by them, they would not  be  able  to feign innocence, when they are made liable to  suffer  departmental  action, for their lapses.

21.   On the culmination of a criminal  case  in  acquittal,  the  concerned investigating/prosecuting official(s) responsible for  such  acquittal  must necessarily be identified.  A finding needs to be  recorded  in  each  case, whether the lapse was innocent or blameworthy.   Each  erring  officer  must suffer the consequences of his lapse, by  appropriate  departmental  action, whenever called for.  Taking  into  consideration  the  seriousness  of  the matter,  the  concerned  official  may  be  withdrawn   from   investigative responsibilities,  permanently  or  temporarily,  depending  purely  on  his culpability.  We also  feel  compelled  to  require  the  adoption  of  some indispensable measures, which may reduce the malady suffered by  parties  on both  sides  of  criminal  litigation.   8Accordingly  we  direct,  the  Home Department of every State Government, to formulate a  procedure  for  taking action  against  all  erring  investigating/prosecuting  officials/officers. All such erring officials/officers identified, as  responsible  for  failure of a prosecution  case,  on  account  of  sheer  negligence  or  because  of culpable lapses, must  suffer  departmental  action.   The  above  mechanism formulated would infuse seriousness in the performance of investigating  and prosecuting duties, and would ensure that investigation and 9prosecution  are purposeful and decisive.  The instant direction shall also be  given  effect to within 6 months.

22.   A copy of the instant judgment shall be transmitted  by  the  Registry of this Court, to the Home Secretaries of all State  Governments  and  Union Territories, within one week.  All the  concerned  Home  Secretaries,  shall ensure  compliance  of  the  directions  recorded  above.   The  records  of consideration, in compliance with the above direction, shall be maintained.10

23.   We hope and trust the Home Department of the State  of  Gujarat,  will identify the erring officers in the instant case, and will take  appropriate departmental action against them,  as  may  be  considered  appropriate,  in accordance with law.

Image from here

Got Something To Say:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

*

  • It’s very effortless to find out any matter on web as compared to textbooks,
    as I found this post at this web page.

  • Virendra Kumar Jain says:

    I have written the following letter to Home Secretary, Govt. of Haryana and others including the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana and the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Kindly help me in getting justice.

    From:
    Virendra Kumar Jain
    (Advocate)
    Son of Shri Laxman Swaroop Jain
    Flat No.32, Sunrise Apartments
    D-Block, Vikaspuri New Delhi-110018
    Mobile: 09717504697
    Email: veerjain56@gmail.com

    Hon’ble Sir,

    Subject: Action against erring police officials in the matter of FIR No.480/2009 registered on 19.09.2009 at 7.30 PM by City Police Station, Gurgaon on the false complaint of Ms. Priya Jain for –
    Falsely implicating innocent persons, by filing Challan in the CJM Court, Gurgaon on the basis of fabricated false documents without holding any investigation; and
    Recording and fabricating false Jimni No.3A dated 22.09.2009 authored by Shri Surendra Singh, the then ACP (City), Gurgaon.
    Directions given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India while delivering judgment dated 07.01.2013 in Crl. Appeal No.1485 of 2008 titled “State of Gujarat Vs. Kishanbhai, etc.”

    I, the humble Petitioner, respectfully showeth as under:-

    CORRUPT REGISTRATION OF FIR ON FALSE COMPLAINT IN VIOLATION OF DEPARTMENTAL GUIDELINES ISSUED BY DGP (HARYANA)

    That on the basis of an absolutely false complaint lodged by Ms. Priya Jain an FIR No.480/2009 was corruptly registered by City Police Station, Gurgaon on 19.09.2009 under monetary consideration and undue influence of then DCP (West), Gurgaon, Shri Rakesh Arya in flagrant violation of departmental guidelines issued by DGP, Haryana.

    ILLEGAL ARRREST OF ACCUSED PERSONS ADMITTEDLY ON VERBAL INSTRUCTION OF THE THEN DCP (WEST), GURGAON, SHRI RAKESH ARYA

    That all the persons, including two women, named in the FIR, (who are my relatives), were illegally arrested within 12 hours of registration of the said FIR without conducting any investigation under the illegal verbal directions of the DCP (West), Shri Rakesh Arya, as admitted by the then SHO and the IO/ASI of the City Police Station, Gurgaon.

    CHALLAN FILED IN THE COURT WITHOUT INVESTIGATION ON THE BASIS OF FABRICATED AND FALSE DOCUMENTS

    That the police officials concerned did not make any investigation in the matter and filed Challan in the CJM Court, Gurgaon falsely implicating the persons named in the FIR on the basis of fabricated and false documents.

    That when it was alleged that no investigation in the matter was made by the police and the version of the side of the accused persons were not heard, it was informed by the office of the DCP (West), Gurgaon to the office of the Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon that Shri Surendra Singh, the then ACP (City), Gurgaon, also heard the side of the accused persons and recorded Jimni No.3A on 22.09.2009 and a copy of the said Jimni was furnished to the office of the Commissioner of Police.

    RECORDING OF FALSE JIMNI NO.3A DATED 22.09.2009 AUTHORED BY THE THEN ACP (CITY), SHRI SURENDRA SINGH

    That I had a copy of the said Jimni wherein a statement, purportedly given by me as a witness from the side of the accused persons, also appear. In this regard I state as under:-

    1. A statement appearing in Jimni No.3A dated 22.09.2009 (extracted below) prepared and authored by Shri Surendra Singh, ACP (City), Gurgaon on 22.09.2009 in connection with FIR No.480/2009 (registered at City police station, Gurgaon on 19.09.2009 by Ms. Priya Jain), has been attributed to me and it has been mentioned therein that I appeared before the said police officer on 22.09.2009 from the side of the accused persons and gave a statement shown in bold below:-

    ‌‌‌‌‌थाना शहर गुडगांव
    मु. न. 480 दि. 19.9.2009
    घटना स्थल: जैकबपुरा, गुडगांव
    घटना तिथि: जिला: गुडगांव
    जिम्म्नी संख्या: 3A
    प्राप्ति: 25.9.2009
    26.9.2009
    अपराध धारा 498ए, 406, 323, 506, 34 भा.द.स. थाना शहर, गुडगांव

    राज्य द्वारा श्रीमती प्रिया जैन
    बनाम
    लेखक: सुरेंद्र सिंह, सहायक पुलिस आयुक्त शहर गुडगांव
    श्रीमान जी,
    बासिलसिला रिपोर्ट जिमनी न.3ए —– लिखित स.उ.नि. भंवर सिंह, थाना शहर गुडगांव ने मिसल मुकदमा व अभियोग से सम्बंधित व्यक्तिगण को मुकदमा हजा की तस्दीक हेतु मेरे सम्मुख कार्यालय में पेश किये हैं. मिसल मुकदमा तहवील खुद में लेकर अध्ययन किया गया.
    परिवादी पक्ष:
    1. श्रीमति प्रिया जैन
    2. श्रीमति कनक्माला जैन
    3. श्री सतपाल जैन
    4. जितेंद्र
    5. अशोक कुमार जैन
    6. सतीश कुमार जैन
    ————————Statement of above-named persons written——————-

    प्रतिवादी पक्ष:
    1. विरेंद्र जैन पुत्र श्री लक्ष्मन स्वरूप जैन वासी मकान नम्बर 32, सनराईज अपार्ट्मेंट, विकास्पुरी नई दिल्ली (लड्के का मामा)
    2. राजेंद्र कुमार जैन पुत्र श्री सुरेश चंद जैन वासी 63 TIF लार्ड बुद्धा अपार्ट्मेंट, दिल्ली, पीरगढी (लडके की मौसी का बेटा)
    3. आदेश जैन पुत्र महेंद्र कुमार जैन वासी D 14, पंजाबी बस्ती, नांगलोई, दिल्ली (लडके के ताऊ का बेटा)
    4. पवन कुमार जैन, पुत्र राजकुमार जैन वासी मकान नम्बर 17, भोगल रोड, जनकपुरी दिल्ली (लडके के ताऊ का बेटा)
    5. सुनील कुमार जैन पुत्र श्री बृजलाल जैन वासी मकान नम्बर 887, सनलाइट कालोनी, हरीनगर दिल्ली (लडके के ताऊ का बेटा)
    इस समय तक पूछ्ताछ पर विरेंद्र जैन पुत्र श्री लक्ष्मन स्वरूप जैन वासी मकान नम्बर 32, सनराईज अपार्ट्मेंट, विकास्पुरी नई दिल्ली (लड्के का मामा) ने बतलाया कि उसके भांजे की शादी दिनांक 11.12.08 को हिंदु रीति रिवाज से प्रिया से हुई थी. उसकी बहन का लडका होने के नाते वह खुद भी शादी में गया था. रिश्तेदारी होने के नाते वह घर आता जाता रहता था. दान दहेज जैसी किसी भी प्रकार की कोई बात उसने आज तक उनके मुह से नही सुनी है. मुकदमा हजा में जेठ नीरज जैन व जेठानी अन्नु जैन, देवर अजीत कुमार जैन को दहेज जैसी बातो से कोई लेना देना नही है ये बिल्कुल बेकसूर हैं. विरेंद्र जैन जो पंकज का मामा है, जिसका नाम प्रिया जैन ने गलत लिखवा दिया है, जो गलत है जिनका नाम मुकदमा हजा से निकाला जाये.

    2. I am to state that neither I nor any other person, whose statements have been extracted above, ever appeared before the aforesaid police official or before any other police official on 22.09.2009 or on any other date and did not give the aforesaid statement or any other statement.

    3. It is submitted that the aforesaid Jimni has been fabricated and is false and fictitious and the same was fabricated to implicate innocent persons in false case and based on the said Jimni, City Police Station, Gurgaon filed a false Challan against innocent persons thereby violating their fundamental right to life and liberty.

    Action to be taken against the erring police official

    Since the aforesaid police official, Shri Surendra Singh, ACP (City), Gurgaon had falsely implicated innocent persons in the matter of the aforesaid FIR, I request you to please take necessary action against him and other police officials who connived with him, in compliance of the Directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India given to all Home Secretaries of the States while passing the judgment dated 07.01.2013 in Crl. Appeal No.1485 of 2008 in State of Gujarat Vs. Kishanbhai, etc., the relevant portion whereof is extracted below:-

    “17. If the accused was wrongfully prosecuted, his suffering is unfathomable. Here also, the investigating and prosecuting agencies are blameworthy. It is therefore necessary, not to overlook even the hardship suffered by the accused, first during the trial of the case, and then at the appellate stages. An innocent person does not deserve to suffer the turmoil of a long drawn litigation, spanning over a decade, or more. The expenses incurred by an accused in his defence can dry up all his financial resources – ancestral or personal. Criminal litigation could also ordinarily involve financial borrowings. An accused can be expected to be under a financial debt, by the time his ordeal is over.

    18. It is not untrue, that for all the wrong reasons, innocent persons are subjected to suffer the ignominy of criminal prosecution and to suffer shame and humiliation. Just like it is the bounden duty of a court to serve the cause of justice to the victim, so also, it is the bounden duty of a court to ensure that an innocent person is not subjected to the rigours of criminal prosecution.

    19. It should also be ensured, that the evidence gathered during investigation is truly and faithfully utilized, by confirming that all relevant witnesses and materials for proving the charges are conscientiously presented during the trial of a case. This would achieve two purposes. Only persons against whom there is sufficient evidence, will have to suffer the rigors of criminal prosecution. By following the above procedure, in most criminal prosecutions, the concerned agencies will be able to successfully establish the guilt of the accused.

    20. Likewise, every acquittal should ordinarily lead to the inference, that an innocent person was wrongfully prosecuted. It is therefore, essential that every State should put in place a procedural mechanism, which would ensure that the cause of justice is served, which would simultaneously ensure the safeguard of interest of those who are innocent.

    21. We also feel compelled to require the adoption of some indispensable measures, which may reduce the malady suffered by parties on both sides of criminal litigation. Accordingly we direct, the Home Department of every State Government, to formulate a procedure for taking action against all erring investigating/prosecuting officials /officers. All such erring officials/officers identified, as responsible for failure of a prosecution case, on account of sheer negligence or because of culpable lapses, must suffer departmental action. The above mechanism formulated would infuse seriousness in the performance of investigating and prosecuting duties, and would ensure that investigation and prosecution are purposeful and decisive. The instant direction shall also be given effect to within 6 months.

    22. A copy of the instant judgment shall be transmitted by the Registry of this Court, to the Home Secretaries of all State Governments and Union Territories, within one week. All the concerned Home Secretaries shall ensure compliance of the directions recorded above.”

    PRAYER

    In view of the aforesaid that no investigation was conducted and no evidence is on record and that Challan has been filed on the basis of false and fabricated documents thereby violating the fundamental rights of the accused persons, it is prayed that Your Lordship may be pleased to take cognizance of the matter and direct the State of Haryana to investigate and initiate action against all the erring police officials for falsely implicating innocent persons in the said criminal case. In the meanwhile the criminal proceedings in the case pending in the Gurgaon Court may kindly be stayed.

    Thanks and regards,
    (Virendra Kumar Jain)
    Humble Petitioner
    Date: 21.01.2014
    Place: New Delhi

  • very effective judgement. In fact the public prosecutor in lower courts do not conduct properly. Sometimes it is realised that such exercise is useless.

Top