Criminal cases against cops: HC issues show-cause notice to Punjab home secretary on perjury proceedings

The Punjab and Haryana high court has issued a show-cause notice to additional chief secretary, home, Punjab, Anurag Aggarwal why perjury proceedings should not be initiated against him

The Punjab and Haryana high court has issued a show-cause notice to additional chief secretary, home, Punjab, Anurag Aggarwal why perjury proceedings should not be initiated against him.

Criminal cases against cops: HC issues show-cause notice to Punjab home secretary on perjury proceedings

The order was passed in a matter in which high court had sought information regarding criminal cases against cops. The concealment about FIRs had come light in the hearing of a plea in December from Moga resident Surjit Singh, who had challenged his dismissal from service, due to pending FIRs. During proceedings of the case, it has come to light that at least 107 convicted cops, including SPs, DSPs, inspectors, and 840 facing serious criminal charges are still serving in Punjab Police.

An affidavit was filed by Vijay Singh Chauhan, deputy secretary, department of home affairs and justice, Punjab, on October 8 disclosing the names of officers, who were facing criminal cases. However, petitioner’s counsel Balbir Saini contended that the entire information has not been disclosed. On October 28, the court sought an affidavit from Aggarwal. He filed an affidavit on December 10, but on allegations of discrepancies in the same, the court on January 14, asked him to personally look into the matter to ascertain factual aspects. On February 1 this year, he filed an affidavit admitting of wrong information in the December 10 affidavit.

The high court bench of justice Anupinder Singh Grewal observed that it is apparent that the information, as sought by the court, was not forthcoming. Aggarwal should have taken due care and caution as it is expected from the administrative head of the department to disclose the entire information as had been sought by the court, the bench said, adding that concealment or not disclosing the information sought, amounts to swearing a false affidavit.

“The filing of false affidavit has the tendency to subvert, obstruct, impede and interfere in the due course of judicial proceedings, which cannot be overlooked especially when the affidavit has been filed by a senior government officer,” the bench observed, adding that besides the contempt of court, such an act would amount to giving false evidence to court. Before directing institution of a criminal complaint before the competent judicial magistrate for the prosecution of the officer for perjury, I deem it appropriate to issue him notice, the bench added seeking his response within four weeks as to why directions be not issued for filing a complaint with the judicial magistrate for the offence of perjury.

Questions how PPS posted as SSPs

Giving an example, the bench said that Rajinder Singh Sohal, convicted in a criminal case has been posted as the SSP of Gurdaspur. He is a PPS officer and has been posted as Gurdaspur SSP, which is an IPS-cadre post. The continuation of such an officer at the post of the SSP, who is the district head of the police force, would erode the confidence of the people in the police administration apart from being an affront to the rule of law. Therefore, the competent authority should consider transferring him from the post, the bench said.

It observed that there are several other PPS officers, who have been posted as SSPs of various districts in violation of the Indian Police Service (Cadre) Rules, 1954. Impleading Centre as a party to look into these apparent violations, the court further said that it is apparent that there is arbitrariness in dealing with officers facing criminal cases. “In our system of governance administered by rule of law, the government cannot act like an absolute despot at its whims and fancies by patronising certain officers while imparting a step-motherly treatment to others,” it said, adding that the need of the hour to put in place a proper structure.

Now, the government has been asked to file an affidavit by the next date to explain as to why PPS officers have been posted as SSPs of several districts.

The bench also asked that government committee, which is in the process of framing a policy on action to be taken against cops with criminal cases/ convicted, would come up with a uniform policy while keeping in mind gravity and nature of the offence. The court has directed that till the committee arrives at a decision and considers the individual cases of the officers, no police officer who is charge-sheeted or convicted in a criminal case involving moral turpitude, shall remain posted at a post having public dealing. They shall not be assigned investigation, either as investigating officer or in a supervisory capacity and will not be posted in the vigilance bureau till the final decision is taken by the committee. They shall also not be posted in the district where their criminal case is being tried, the bench said seeking status report by April 28.