Legally Speaking

MP HIGH COURT SEEKS DGP’S REPLY: DOES POLICE’S FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE FULL CRIMINAL ANTECEDENTS OF ACCUSED AMOUNTS TO MISCONDUCT, INTERFERENCE WITH JUSTICE?

The Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case Kuldeep Dohare Versus the State of Madhya Pradesh observed, recently the Gwalior bench directed the Director General of Police, State of Madhya Pradesh to file an affidavit explaining as to whether non-communication of criminal antecedents of an Applicant or Accused to the Court is a minor misconduct or if it amounts to interference with the criminal justice dispensation system. Before the next date of hearing, the affidavit is to be filled.

The bench comprising of Justice G.S. Ahluwalia observed and remarked that the court was frequently finding that the police authorities were not sending the complete criminal antecedents, in spite of the circular issued by Police Headquarters.

It was observed that the police authorities did not send the criminal antecedents of the applicant. Furthermore, it is clear that it is a clear attempt to facilitate the applicant to obtain bail by projecting that he has no criminal antecedents. The issue raised is weather the conduct of police officers can be said to be a minor negligence or it is an interference with the criminal justice dispensation system?

In the present case, the court was dealing with a bail application moved by the accused applicant for offences punishable under section 307, Section 149, section 148, section 147, section 506, section 294, section 201. On an earlier hearing, the court had observed that even though the case diary did not reflect any criminal antecedents on the part of the Applicant. The impugned order passed by the lower court rejecting his bail application mentioned otherwise.

It was observed that a reply was sought by the court from the Superintendent of Police, District Bhind as to why the important information with regard to the criminal antecedents of the Applicant were withheld by the respective SHO. The SP informed the Court on the subsequent hearing that the SHO concerned as well as the Investigating Officer in the case were found guilty of misconduct and were fined with Rs. 2,000 and Rs. 5,000, respectively.

The Court observed that since the problem was stemming from different police stations. However, the DGP should file his reply regarding the prevailing situation-

Since in different police station, this situation is prevailing. Therefore, an affidavit is directed to be filled by the DGP, State of Madhya Pradesh as to whether non- communication of criminal antecedents of an applicant is a minor misconduct or it amounts to interfere with the criminal antecedents of justice dispensation system.

Accordingly, the affidavit needs to be filled within a period of 1 week, the matter would be heard next on 08.07.2022.

PRANSHI AGARWAL

Recent Posts

Indira Bhawan, a tribute to the former Prime Minister

The new Congress headquarters, Indira Bhawan, was inaugurated on the Kotla Road in the capital,…

11 minutes ago

Swami Vivekananda: The spiritual foundation of netaji’s mission

January marks the birth of two of India’s greatest sons, whose contributions ignited the flame…

15 minutes ago

Key Quad Diplomats Set To Meet In Washington After Trump’s Inauguration

The upcoming Quad foreign ministers’ meeting signals continuity in Indo-Pacific diplomacy under Trump’s second term.…

19 minutes ago

PM security lapse case: Arrest warrants issued against 25 farmers

The security lapse involving Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his visit to Punjab three years…

21 minutes ago

BJP unveils manifesto, vows Rs 2,500 to women in delhi

Promises to implement Ayushman Bharat Yojana in Delhi, attacks AAP’s Mohalla Clinics, calling it den…

28 minutes ago

IMF Raises UK Growth Forecast, Warns Of Potential Risks From Trump’s Economic Policies

The IMF upgraded the UK’s growth forecast to 1.6% for 2025, highlighting Labour’s investment plans.…

1 hour ago