High Court raps Haryana police for 'investigational apathy'

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, February 2

Taking cognisance of a growing tendency among the investigating officers to mechanically label accused as uncooperative even after joining the probe, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has told the Haryana Director-General of Police and Gurugram Commissioner of Police to look into their conduct.

Describing the conduct of such officers as “highly deplorable”, Justice Harnaresh Singh Gill of the High Court has also rapped the investigating agency for “investigational apathy”. Justice Gill asserted that it was worth mentioning that the High Court had earlier noticed in umpteen cases that investigating officers passed on instructions to the Advocate-General’s office that the accused had joined the probe. But he was not cooperating with the investigating agency. “As a matter of fact, such a mechanism on the investigating officer’s part had become a growing tendency in the recent past. The instant case is a classic example of the lacklustre approach and investigational apathy on the probing agency’s part,” Justice Gill asserted.

The matter was brought to Justice Gill’s notice after the accused filed a petition, seeking anticipatory bail in an FIR registered on September 18, 2019, at the DLF Phase-II police station in Gurugram for cheating and criminal conspiracy under Sections 420 and 120-B of the IPC and the provisions of the Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013.

Justice Gill observed that the petitioner’s counsel, on one hand, produced an acknowledgement/receipt issued by the investigating officer, mentioning that he had joined the probe. The investigating officer, on the other hand, stated that the petitioner had indeed joined the investigation. Yet he was not cooperating with the investigating agency.

Justice Gill further observed that the perusal of the acknowledgment/ receipt made it apparent that the investigating officer did not mention even a single word about the petitioner not cooperating with the investigating agency. Ironically, he took a contrary stand in the “pairvi report”. Such an act and conduct on the investigating officers’ part in the State of Haryana, especially in Gurugram District, was highly deplorable.

“As such, the State counsel is directed to impress upon the Director-General of Police, Haryana, and the Commissioner of Police, Gurugram, to look into the conduct of such investigating officers,” Justice Gill ordered.

Before parting with the case, Justice Gill added that the petitioner had joined investigation and the fact was duly authenticated by the investigating officer as deciphered from the acknowledgment/receipt. As such, the petition was allowed and order dated November 8, 2019, granting interim bail to the petitioner was made absolute.

Cheating case

The admonition came in a cheating case, where the State counsel — on instructions from the official concerned — submitted that the accused had joined the probe as directed, but was not cooperating.