The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) has directed senior superintendent of police (SSP) Kanwardeep Kaur and superintendent of police ( SP cyber crime) Ketan Bansal to file their affidavits by October 15 for delay in the probe into a 2017 criminal case registered on the complaint of sexual harassment by a woman.
The HC bench of justice Sumeet Goel also directed Chandigarh director general of police (DGP) Surendra Singh Yadav to file his affidavit delineating the responsibilities of the senior police officers, including the Chandigarh SSP, regarding their role in supervising the investigation of criminal cases.
The order was passed while hearing a plea from a person seeking quashing of the proceedings in a sexual harassment FIR registered in November 2017 at the Industrial Area police station.
On August 5, the HC sought an affidavit from the SSP observing that it appears to be inexplicable that an FIR registered in November 2017 is still pending investigation. An affidavit was filed on August 26 not by the SSP, but by Bansal stating that the complainant was persistently asked to join the investigation, but she failed, and resultantly the investigation has not yet been concluded.
From the record, it came to light that even as Bansal had claimed in the affidavit that the complainant had been persistently asked to join the investigation his submissions were “incorrect and appeared to be against record”. The record revealed that the complainant woman was contacted only once in 2020 and there is no other entry in the case diary even as FIR was registered in 2017. The court also took exception to the fact that an affidavit was called from the SSP but filed by an SP.
{{/usCountry}}From the record, it came to light that even as Bansal had claimed in the affidavit that the complainant had been persistently asked to join the investigation his submissions were “incorrect and appeared to be against record”. The record revealed that the complainant woman was contacted only once in 2020 and there is no other entry in the case diary even as FIR was registered in 2017. The court also took exception to the fact that an affidavit was called from the SSP but filed by an SP.
{{/usCountry}}“The mode and manner of investigation and the reason put forth for non-conclusion of the investigation, despite a lapse of about seven years, appears to be inexplicable, both in law and on facts,” the bench observed.
TThe bench called for OSD (vigilance), Haryana, Manish Dua, and ordered the sealing of the case record and asked him to retain it by himself. However, the court has ordered that Bansal or any other concerned officer, if wants to peruse the record, he would permit them under his supervision.