Monitor Conduct Of Investigating Officers; Take Appropriate Action For Submitting Reports Presenting Selective Evidence To Frame Person: Himachal Pradesh HC To State Govt.
|The Himachal Pradesh High Court has recently directed the State Government, Director General of Police and Director Prosecution to develop a mechanism to monitor the conduct of Investigating Officers/Prosecutors/Government Advocates and to take appropriate action for submitting reports ignoring entire evidence but presenting only selective documents in order to frame a person.
The appeal before the High Court was preferred by the State against the judgment of the Special Judge whereby respondents had been acquitted by the Trial Court in a Corruption Case registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code.
The Division Bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Bipin Chander Negi asserted, “Role and duty of Investigating Agency/Prosecutors and other Officers and Officials associated with them is to churn the truth to ensure imparting justice to the aggrieved persons but not to frame any person by hook or crook or all means in order to complete the challan and presented the same before the Court for trial by ignoring the material proving the innocence of accused/suspects. We are living in an independent Democratic Social Welfare Republic, which strives for the protection of the innocent under a Rule of Law.”
Additional Advocate General Pawan Kumar Nadda represented the Appellant while Advocate Vinay Thakur represented the Respondent.
An anonymous complaint was received by the Chairman, H.P. Board of School Education Dharamshala, alleging that the respondent Chohan Singh had appeared in 10+1 examination and he was placed under compartment in subject of English. He did not appear in the supplementary examination and his result was declared as absent in English.
It was alleged in the complaint that he connived with dealing Clerk and by adopting illegal means, he got his roll number changed in the result sheet from 20073 to 20074 with interpolation of marks sheet reflecting 41 marks obtained by him in English against the changed Roll Number.
It was mainly alleged that the accused persons cheated the H.P. Board of School Education by dishonestly and illegally showing Chohan Singh to have appeared in supplementary examination in September, 2004 for clearing the compartment in English subject when in fact, he had not appeared in the examination. It was further alleged that the Respondents Kishan Chand and Laxmi Singh, who were employees of the Board as Senior Assistant and Junior Assistant, had connived with Chohan Singh in issuance of forged certificate in his favour.
The Bench noted that record produced by prosecution indicated the two names of mother of Chohan Singh i.e. Roshana Devi and Churamani. “In the light of aforesaid evidence on record, it cannot be said beyond reasonable doubt that respondents have committed the offence by getting the name of mother of Chohan Singh changed/corrected from Roshana Devi to Churamani, much less with connivance of other co-accused”, the Bench said.
It was further noticed that no document had been placed on record indicating that correction of Roll Nos.20073 and 20076 to 20074 and 20077 respectively was contrary to the award list or admit card/roll number slip issued to Chohan Singh and Maya Devi. “The material evidence, which could have proved the commission of offence by Chohan Singh and other co-accused or their innocence, like Admit Card, Answer sheet, Roll Number Slip, award list have not been brought on record by the Investigating Agency, rather, Investigating Officer has admitted that she did not take possession of certain documents which could have proved innocence of accused persons. Such conduct is highly deprecable”, the Bench said.
The Bench asserted,“ In every case, where there is evidence of innocence of accused, prosecution/Investigating Agency is expected to act fairly and to place on record entire material and thereafter, is required to submit a report of cancellation of FIR or abortion of criminal action initiated against the accused named in FIR/complaint for having sufficient material proving his innocence.”
The High Court concluded the matter by directing the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to the Government of HP, Director General of Police and Director Prosecution to issue appropriate instructions, impart proper training and conduct orientation programmes to all Investigating Officers/Prosecutors/Government Advocates to ensure fair investigation and prosecution in all cases and filing of challans/cancellation reports after taking into consideration the entire evidence/material available against or in favour of accused/person involved on the basis of complaint/FIR against them.
“The mechanism should also be developed to monitor the conduct of Investigating Officers/Prosecutors/Government Advocates and to take appropriate action for submitting investigation reports/challans in the Court ignoring the entire evidence but presently only selective documents/evidence in order to frame a person, leading to not only unnecessary harassment to such person but also causing sheer wastage of public money, time and energy of not only the persons involved, but also of the Court causing delay in imparting justice in other services, important and genuine matters pending before the Court”, it held.
Thus, in absence of sufficient material to convict the accused-respondents, the Bench dismissed the appeal.
Cause Title: State of HP v. Chohan Singh & others [Neutral Citation: 2024:HHC:10694-DB]
Appearance:
Appellant : Additional Advocate General Pawan Kumar Nadda
Respondents: Advocates Vinay Thakur, Vishwa Bhushan, Gurmeet Bhardwaj and Anuja Mehta