Questioning the sincerity of the Haryana government, the Punjab and Haryana high court on Thursday asked the state as to why probe of 2,100 FIRs registered for February Jat quota violence should not be given to the police of some other state.
The court’s observation came after the state told it that out of 2,048 FIRs, only 182 odd are of “serious” nature.
The state’s response had come after the court asked it to supply a list of “serious” offence cases. The serious offence was neither defined by the state nor the court.
The high court bench of justice SS Saron and justice Darshan Singh was hearing a suo motu petition initiated following widespread violence of February 2016. As per a government appointed panel ₹20,000-crore loss was reported across the state.
As many as 1,196 shops were set ablaze, 371 vehicles were damaged or set on fire, 30 schools and colleges were burnt, 75 houses were set afire, 53 hotels and marriage palaces were devastated, 23 petrol pumps were attacked and 15 religious institutions vandalised.
“Do you have objection if other state (police) is asked to get the investigation done. We can ask Himachal or Rajasthan police…as CBI can’t probe due to large number of cases,” the high court bench asked when apprised by the impartial adviser in the case, senior advocate Anupam Gupta that out of 1,212 FIRs registered in Rohtak, the government says only 30 are “serious” and in Sonepat, out of 192, there are only 12 cases of “serious” nature.
{{/usCountry}}“Do you have objection if other state (police) is asked to get the investigation done. We can ask Himachal or Rajasthan police…as CBI can’t probe due to large number of cases,” the high court bench asked when apprised by the impartial adviser in the case, senior advocate Anupam Gupta that out of 1,212 FIRs registered in Rohtak, the government says only 30 are “serious” and in Sonepat, out of 192, there are only 12 cases of “serious” nature.
{{/usCountry}}Gupta pointed out that Prakash Singh panel in its report had highlighted 128 FIRs out of 192 in its report on Sonepat, while government say there are only 12 cases of “serious” nature.
“.. Which benchmark they have followed I am unable to make out. DGP Haryana is helpless person. He was part of Prakash Singh committee. But now he does nothing,” Gupta said.
The state government, on the other hand, maintained that in large number of cases culprits could not be identified as acts were that of mobs. “Our officers have made their own assessment. If court thinks it not proper, it can re-examined,” additional advocate general Pawan Girdhar said.
The high court bench stressed that it wanted the state police to complete the probe. “It will be dumped and degraded forever (if probe given to police of some other state),” the HC bench observed.
Later it asked the state government to supply names of some senior officers who would supervise the investigation independent of the government.
The high court also asked the government to consider suggestion of Gupta that Prakash Singh be made as head of the SIT.