High Court Directs Arunachal DGP To Take Steps For Separating Investigating Wing From Law & Order Police, Operationalise Complaints Authority

The Gauhati High Court, Itanagar bench, has observed that the public interest in respect of the State of Arunachal Pradesh overwhelmingly requires that immediate effective steps be taken to separate the investigating wing within the police force in the State of Arunachal Pradesh.In this light, a division bench comprising Justices M Bujor Barua and Devashish Baruah has asked the Director General of Police to conduct a thorough exercise and identify such police personnel within the police force who according to their experience, perception and qualification would be suitable for the purpose of carrying out the duties of an investigating officer.The Court has also directed the government to constitute and operationalize Police Complaints Authority, both at the State Level and at the District Level. This exercise has to be completed by the Chief Secretary within a period of 6 months.The direction has been made in view of Supreme Court's judgment in Prakash Singh and others Vs. Union of India and others which held that the investigating police shall be separated from the law and order police to ensure speedier investigation, better expertise and improved rapport with the people. It also said that there shall be a Police Establishment Board in each State which shall decide all transfers, postings, promotions and other service related matters of officers of and below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.The PIL Petitioner herein, a practicing Advocate, had referred to several instances of inadequate investigation which ultimately had resulted in acquittals, to argue for the requirement of separating the investigation wing. The petitioner also contended that the state had seen several instances of police excesses on public and that called for a police complaint authority. The Court stated that on several occasions, judicial notice had been taken of instances where accused persons were acquitted only for the reason that certain basic requirements were neglected during the investigation. The Court highlighted the importance of a proper investigation done in a more scientific method, by taking note of the requirements of the law relating to the offence for which the investigation is made. The Court stated: "…it would be a travesty of justice if an accused is convicted without there being materials on record to prove it beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused alone had committed the offence alleged, it would equally be a travesty of justice if an accused is required to be acquitted merely because the materials which could have been obtained with a more correct investigation could not be obtained to be placed in the trial which would result in the accused being acquitted for the reason of the prosecution being unable to prove it beyond reasonable doubt that it is the accused who had committed the offence." Apart from the Supreme Court, in its Prakash Singh ruling, the Law Commission of India, in its 154th report, had recommended such separation to ensure speedier investigation, better expertise and improved rapport with the people, the Court observed. It was explained that the requirement of an investigation would also require knowledge of law relating to the offence, as well as the foresight on the part of the investigation as to what material to look for in a particular investigation. The Court observed that the Prakash Singh Judgment was rendered in 2006, but it had remained unimplemented in Arunachal Pradesh. Although a notification was issued for constitution of a Complaint Authority in the State and for separating the investigating police, it remained on paper.The Court, therefore, made the following directions: Directed the Director General of Police, Arunachal Pradesh to conduct a thorough exercise and identify such police personnel within the police force who according to their experience, perception and qualification would be suitable for the purpose of carrying out the duties of an investigating officer.The number of such personnel to be carved out from the regular police force may be suitably determined by the Director General of Police depending upon the volume of criminal cases to be investigated in the State as a whole and also in respect of the individual police stations. If the individual police stations have higher load of criminal investigation to be made, more than one investigating officer can be considered to be posted in such police stations and in respect of other police stations where the volume of criminal investigation to be made would be correspondingly much lower, it can also be considered as to whether one investigating officer can cover more than one police station, which again would depend on the geographical location and other logistics involved between two such police stations.Director General of Police, Arunachal Pradesh directed to provide the Court with a list of such persons from the police force who would...

High Court Directs Arunachal DGP To Take Steps For Separating Investigating Wing From Law & Order Police, Operationalise Complaints Authority

EKTA RATHORE

Tags