The Supreme Court of India, in a landmark ruling reaffirmed that the unlawful acts committed by public servants under the guise of performing official duties shall not be protected under the law. The observation by the Court during the hearing of a case related to alleged fake encounter, where nine police officers including a Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) were accused of killing a civilian as well as tampering of evidence.
Facts of the Case:-
- On June 16, 2015, a white Hyundai i-20 car on the Verka-Batala Road in Amritsar, was intercepted by a group of nine policemen.
- As per the complaint filed, the officers in civil dresses, armed with pistols and assault rifles, opened fire at a close range, thereby killing the driver, Mukhjit Singh @ Mukha.
- According to the eye-witnesses, who claimed to have witnessed the shooting and raised an alarm, thus drawing attention of the public, also claimed that DCP Parampal Singh, who shortly arrived after the incident, ordered to remove the registration plates of the car so as to destroy the evidence.
Supreme Court’s Decision-
- In its ruling, a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta has dismissed the appeal which was filed on behalf of the nine policemen, where they had challenged the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court passed in May 2019, where the HC has refused to quash the charges against them.
Key Observations by the Apex Court
- The bench noted that surrounding a civilian vehicle and firing in plain clothes could not be said to be related to maintenance of public order or lawful arrest.
- It was held by the Court that Section 197 of CrPC, which requires prior sanction to prosecute public servants for acts done in official duty, was not applicable in this case.
- The Court commented, “The cloak of official duty cannot be extended to acts intended to thwart justice.”
- In a significant development, charges of destroying the evidence against the DGP, which were previously quashed by the High Court, have been restored by the Supreme Court.
- The Court commented that any such act which has been "directed to erasing potential evidence", including events such as removal of number plates, could not be considered as bona fide police work.
- The Bench mentioned that, “Where the very accusation is suppression of evidence, the nexus is absent on the face of the record. In such a situation, the bar of Section 197 CrPC is not attracted.”
Prima Facie Evidence Presented:-
The Apex Court observed that numerous prima facie evidence are sufficient to proceed with the trial:
- Depositions by two eyewitnesses provided under Section 200 of the CrPC have given a statement supporting the complaint filed.
- A CCTV clip supporting the complaint has been found
- SIT (Special Investigation Team) found that the version of self defense provided by the Police is false, recommending prosecution for culpable homicide.
Orders By the Magistrate and Sessions Court Upheld:-
No legal error or perversity on part of the Lower Court was noticed by the Apex Court, hence further ensuring that the evidence provided during the trial were justified.
Conclusion
The ruling by the SC reaffirms the stance of the judiciary on the fact that the police excesses and unlawful acts by them could not be cloaked as official privilege. The Apex Court sends a strong message by denying protection provided under Section 197 CrPC as well as allowing prosecution to proceed, i.e- accountability would, in any case prevail over the uniformed impunity.
The said matter would now continue through the trial process.
For further information on the Subject, or to follow similar legal news, you may follow our blog under Sharks of Law or on instagram and youtube. If you are involved in a civil or criminal case and wish to talk to a lawyer online or seek free legal counsel, you may contact us through the following information.
Email:-helpdesk@sharksoflaw.com
Help Desk:-+91-88770-01993
