Six held for Covid norm violation in May: Show cause notice issued to Samastipur SP

The Ujiyarpur police on May 25 booked six persons on charges of alleged violation of Covid-19 guidelines at a village haat; The concerned court, however, observed that the police booked the persons under wrong and non-existent sections, and response of police officers concerned was far from satisfactory

The subdivisional judicial magistrate, Dalsinghsarai, has issued a show cause notice to Samastipur superintendent of police (SP) to reply as to why a criminal contempt of court not be initiated against him in a case pertaining to the arrest of six persons by Ujiyarpur police station for alleged violation of Covid-19 protocol in May this year.

The Ujiyarpur police on May 25 lodged an FIR against six persons and arrested three of them the same day on charges of alleged violation of Covid-19 guidelines at a village haat . (HT FILE)

In an order passed by additional chief judicial magistrate Vivek Vishal Monday, SP Manavjit Singh Dhillon has been asked to reply within 30 days of the receipt of the court order, while directing the inspector general of police, Darbhanga, to inquire into the SP’s conduct and take action against all police officers involved in the case and subsequent investigation.

The Ujiyarpur police on May 25 lodged an FIR against six persons and arrested three of them the same day on charges of alleged violation of Covid-19 guidelines at a village haat under various sections of Indian Penal Code (IPC), Endemic Act, Disaster Management (DM) Act and Section 41 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which were not established by the prosecution so far. The remaining three accused were arrested June 7. The arrested persons were granted bail the next day of their production in court.

The concerned court, however, observed that the police booked the persons under wrong and non-existent sections, and the responses of the police officers concerned was far from satisfactory. It said that the police applied Section 81 of the DM act, which is non-existent.

It further clarified that the police had applied Section 56 of the DM Act in the FIR against the civilians, which is also wrong, as the section empowers the police to arrest government officials only.

The court also disputed claims of the SP that the police was empowered to arrest anyone under Section 41 of the CrPC without an arrest warrant in this case. Citing the Supreme Court’s judgement in the Arnesh Kumar versus the state of Bihar case, the SDJM clarified that though the police had the power to arrest anyone indulging in any cognizable offence, they need to specify the grounds for the arrest in writing.

The court also pointed out that Section 41 of CrPC would apply, as the arrest of three persons out of six was made 12 days after the alleged incident.

Noting that the intent and conduct of the police in the case was improper, the court earlier asked the SP to submit the reply in the case for misuse of the power by the police, but the SP and the SDPO refused to comply.

The SP also questioned the authority of the court when it asked him to be ready for contempt of court proceedings.

The SDJM, in the aforementioned order, found tone and language of the SP objectionable in his belated reply to the court’s summon.

“It appears that the SP Samastipur is either not aware how to submit reply to the court or knowingly trying to demean the authority of the court. This court considers that comparing with the SHO, the SP has intentionally demeaned the authority of the court,” read the judgement.

Dhillon, when contacted, said that he would submit the reply to the court in an appropriate legal way.