E-Paper
Official asked to file reply on transfer of criminal cases
TAKING SERIOUS note of frequent transfer of criminal cases from civil police to the CB-CID, the Allahabad High Court has directed Principal Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh Government, to file a detailed reply (counter-affidavit) by July 13, 2006 indicating the total number of cases, where investigations are pending with the CB-CID and the maximum period of time the investigation has been pending in various cases.
TAKING SERIOUS note of frequent transfer of criminal cases from civil police to the CB-CID, the Allahabad High Court has directed Principal Secretary (Home), Uttar Pradesh Government, to file a detailed reply (counter-affidavit) by July 13, 2006 indicating the total number of cases, where investigations are pending with the CB-CID and the maximum period of time the investigation has been pending in various cases.
The report would also indicate the number of cases, where investigations were pending (with submission of charge sheets or final reports) for period over 10 years, below 10 and over five years, below five years and over three years, below three years and over one year and below one year.
Passing the above directive, a division bench observed, “This is a pathetic state of affairs when an accused person can have the choice of the investigating agency, which must dance to his tune. These orders transferring the investigation at the instance of the accused in a case under section 302 (murder) of Indian Penal Code were also in contravention of the directions of the apex court in the case of Union of India Vs WN Chandha (AIR 1993) SC 1082 and CBI Vs Rajesh Gandhi 1997 CRLJ.”
This order was passed by a division bench comprising Justice Imtiyaz Murtaza and Justice Amar Saran in writ petition filed by Sandeep Kumar Yadav of district Basti.
The court directed principal secretary (home) to give the details of number of accused in the aforesaid year wise breakup of categories who have not been arrested and sent to jail. The information may be furnished in tabular form.
The court has also desired the principal secretary (home) may also furnish details about number of cases, which were entrusted to the CB-CID in the last 24 months. The details of each case must mention the number and crime number and also the date of FIR. Sections under Penal Code or other laws, details of transfer, recommendations for transfer and consent of SSP/SP of the district was also required to be furnished.
This court said unwarranted political interference with the investigation process specially when the accused belonged to ruling party and the abject submission of police officers who readily issue no-objection certificates without assigning valid reasons to such illegitimate demands of the political leadership, had become the order of the day. Unfortunately this trait was not only confined to the present political dispensation, but such interference with the investigation process had become the hallmark of all or any political party who may be in power at the moment. This resulted in delayed or unfair investigation which had the potential of eroding people’s faith in governance, recourse to extra-legal pressure for preventing the police from booking the real offenders of crime who, thereby, went unpunished, and eventual breakdown of civil life, observed the court.
