Explain why contempt proceedings be not initiated, Punjab and Haryana High Court asks IPS officer

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, May 21

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has called upon Ferozepur SSP Saumya Mishra to explain why proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act should not be initiated against her.

The direction came after Justice Sandeep Moudgil of the high court observed that the court was, prima facie, satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Mishra had wilfully, deliberately and intentionally violated its order by choosing not to appear on a totally whimsical ground.

“Non-compliance with court orders or undertakings, where the higher echelon of police administration knowingly and voluntarily fails or refuses to comply with the same, pose a risk to the administration of justice by bringing the court into disrespect. Such non-compliance undermines the essence of a court’s authority and threatens the rule of law,” Justice Moudgil asserted.

Justice Moudgil was hearing a case revolving around a minor’s kidnapping. The Bench asserted an IPS officer of SSP rank was not expected to take the court’s direction non-seriously particularly in the light of the issue involved.

Justice Moudgil noted that the minor girl remained untraced, despite an FIR’s registration in August 2022 for kidnapping and another offence under Sections 363 and 366-A of the IPC at the Guruharsahai police station in Ferozepur. Besides this, the “seriousness of the investigating officer was under cloud”.

Justice Moudgil also took note of the State counsel’s submission that the officer thought it proper to stay at her station to ensure maintenance of law and order following intelligence inputs and serious apprehension following an incident. She, as such, deputed Ferozepur SP (Investigation) to attend the court on her behalf.

Justice Moudgil asserted the explanation put forth by the State counsel showing her helplessness to appear before the court was by no means plausible. The officer deputed by Mishra to attend the court proceedings in her place might have been assigned to manage the situation where a law and order disturbance was anticipated.

In any case, she ought to have furnished an application seeking exemption before the court. But she deliberately showed disrespect to the court directions. The matter will now come up for hearing in May last week.