SC Directions Regarding Police Reforms Fallen On ‘Deaf Ears’ Even After Passage Of Long Time: Gujarat HC In Alleged Police Brutality Against Senior Citizen
The Gujarat High Court in a case, said that the directions of the Supreme Court in Prakash Singh & Ors. v. Union of India (2006) regarding the police reforms have fallen on deaf ears even after passage of long time.
The Court was dealing with a special criminal application preferred by a senior citizen seeking a direction to conduct a detailed inquiry into the alleged case of police brutality against him.
A Single Bench of Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar remarked, “… it would not be out of place to take note of the fact that though the Hon’ble Apex Court has given directions in the case of Prakash Singh (Supra) with regard to police reforms and even otherwise there is a provision of section 147 of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951, misuse of police powers are widespread and day in and day out number of complaints being received against the behavior of police personnel. … But, even after passage of long time, the said directions have fallen on deaf ears and situation does not seem to be showing any noticeable change.”
Advocates Vasvi N. Kapadia and Nisarg S. Shah represented the applicant while Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Trupesh Kathiriya represented the respondents.
Factual Background -
The petitioner claimed to be the Vice President of Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) as well as the Trustee/Secretary of Ajit Seva Trust Panjrapole, Vapi and was actively fighting for the welfare of all living creatures and had rescued numerous animals from being illegally slaughtered. As per his case, in 2021, he had intercepted three trucks which were carrying animals without any pass permit and in violation of the Transportation Rules read with Motor Vehicles Rules and had informed about the same to the police control room pursuant to which the police personnel had reached the place of incident and had informed the petitioner that he has been summoned by the Police Inspector.
When the petitioner went there, he was called inside the cabin of the Police Inspector. It was alleged that the Police Inspector lashed out on the petitioner and abused him for intercepting the vehicles and was brutally beaten. It was further submitted that his left eardrum was ruptured and there was a blood clot and perforation in the same. Hence, he filed a complaint seeking disciplinary action against the offender but no action was taken according to him. Hence, he was before the High Court seeking a few reliefs.
The High Court after hearing the arguments of parties, observed, “Considering the aforesaid fact, as the complaint was received by the District Police Complaint Authority, as per section 32H(3) of the Gujarat Police Act, the complaint of the petitioner was required to be investigated by the committee. … Even after the investigation of the said complaint in terms of section 32H(B), the report is not sent to the concerned authority for taking appropriate action.”
The Court, therefore, directed the respondent authority to ensure about effective and proper functioning of the (i) Gujarat State Police Complaints Authority and (ii) District Police Complaint Authority in its true and perspective manner.
Furthermore, the Court ordered to look into the grievance raised by the petitioner afresh and take appropriate action in light of the provision of Sections 32H and 32I of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951 and submit the report to the Gujarat State Police Complaints Authority and inform the petitioner about the outcome of his complaint/grievance at the earliest and preferably within a period of one month.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition and issued necessary directions.
Cause Title- Rajesh Hastimal Shah v. State of Gujarat & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:GUJHC:51017)
