Chandigarh, October 6
Implication of innocent persons by the Punjab Police has been a matter of conjecture for a long time. However, the order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court has categorically put the police on the dock for framing people. The bench expressed shock that the police recovered bloodstains from the “scene of the incident” even though no one suffered any injury.
What the bench said
- Division Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice N.S. Shekhawat argued that the excessive zeal of the police to falsely implicate the accused, in connivance with the complainant, was evident in the present case
- The investigating officer claimed to have visited the scene before taking the bloodstains; they were “packaged” and sealed with his “stamp”
Division Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice N.S. Shekhawat argued that the overzealousness of the police to falsely implicate the accused, in connivance with the appellant, was evident from the fact that the investigating officer claimed to have visited the scene before taking the blood stains. They were “turned” into parcels and sealed with his “stamp”.
All the notes prepared in the process were also witnessed by two police officers. One of them stated that he and the investigating officer visited the place when the blood stains were picked up and turned into packages.
“It is shocking to note that no one suffered any injury in this particular case, and the police still took blood stains. This clearly shows that a gross attempt was made by the police to falsely include the accused in the specific case,” the Bench claims.
The Bench was hearing an appeal filed by the “victim petitioner” against the judgment, dated September 2, 2021, passed by the Jalandhar Additional Sessions Judge, acquitting the accused-accused of the charges of attempt to murder, criminal intimidation, criminal conspiracy and other works.
During the hearing, the Bench was told that “very grave and serious charges” were leveled against the accused-accused that they had planned to kill the appellant by providing money to two persons. Even, the investigating officer recovered two empty cartridges from the scene and admitted the same in his examination-in-chief.
The bench argued that it was obvious that no one had witnessed the incident and that the prosecution’s story was cast in doubt.
Confirming the acquittal order, the Judicial Council added that the rule of caution clearly indicates that holding a test parade for identification is necessary, when no one witnessed the event, and the accused were unknown to the complainant or the witnesses.