HC reserves judgment on perjury charges against Punjab IPS officers | chandigarh | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Sep 19, 2017-Tuesday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

HC reserves judgment on perjury charges against Punjab IPS officers

The Punjab and Haryana high court on Wednesday reserved its judgment on the petitions filed by three IPS officers of Punjab BK Uppal, S Chattopadhyaya and Surinder Pal Singh (retd), challenging the perjury charges and strictures slapped against them in a judgment of the special judge, SAS Nagar, on October 1, 2010.

chandigarh Updated: Nov 05, 2014 22:33 IST
HT Correspondent

The Punjab and Haryana high court on Wednesday reserved its judgment on the petitions filed by three IPS officers of Punjab BK Uppal, S Chattopadhyaya and Surinder Pal Singh (retd), challenging the perjury charges and strictures slapped against them in a judgment of the special judge, SAS Nagar, on October 1, 2010.

The special judge, in his verdict, had acquitted Punjab chief minister Parkash Singh Badal and his family members in a disproportionate assets case for “lack of evidence”. However, the judge had asked the Punjab government for legal proceedings against the three IPS officers, who investigated the case, for resiling as key witnesses.

The judgment, in three petitions, were reserved by the court presided over by acting chief justice Ashutosh Mohunta after counsels for all the parties finished their arguments on Wednesday.

While Singh was the investigating officer of the case related to Badals’ disproportionate assets, Uppal was the supervising officer. But the then DIG police, Chattopadhyaya, who was deputed supervisory officer in 2003 to conduct the pre-investigation verification into the allegations of money laundering by Badal’s family members abroad, had also moved the high court for quashing of strictures passed against him.

The SAS Nagar court, in its order, had observed, “The case has crumbled down under the burden of the statements made by the prosecution witnesses. Such like case that fails on account of the reasons that almost all the prosecution witnesses turning hostile, it brings disrepute to the entire criminal justice system and such like matters shake the confidence of the public in the legal system. Therefore, it is obligatory for this court to undertake the exercise of finding out the persons responsible for such like debacle and to take appropriate action against them.”