The Single Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Sheikh Ishrafil vs State (NCT) Of Delhi & Ors. consisting of Justice Asha Menon observed that the functions of the Judiciary and Police are complementary, and each must be allowed to exercise its own function, with due observance of law and order and a concern for individual liberty.
Facts
This petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 CrPC to issue appropriate direction and order in the nature of writ of mandamus in favour of petitioner and against the respondents no.1 to 7 and be directed them not to harass the petitioner and his entire family members in the name of interrogation, while saving the fundamental rights to live with dignity and fearless life as enshrined under Article 21 of constitution of India. The police (respondents No.1 to 7) were coming to the petitioner’s residence under the cover of investigations and were subjecting the petitioner and his family to harassment. An incident had taken place at Jahangir Puri and the police were seeking to allege that he and his family members had been somehow involved in the same.
Contentions Made
Petitioner: The petitioner, as a citizen of this country, had the Fundamental Right to live with dignity and fearlessly, as assured under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the police should be restrained from harassing him and his family.
Respondent: The police was only investigating the Jahangir Puri Riots. During the investigations and questioning of people already apprehended, it was revealed that the petitioner was one of the main conspirators and perpetrators of the entire incident and was evading the process of law. In the garb of the present petition, the petitioner was seeking anticipatory bail, which was not permissible.
Observations of the Court
The Bench noted that as observed in King-Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmad and reiterated in State of West Bengal and Ors. v. Sampat Lal & Ors., the functions of the Judiciary and Police are complementary, and each must be allowed to exercise its own function, with due observance of law and order and a concern for individual liberty. It was also noted that in State of Bihar v. J.A.C. Saldanha, the Supreme Court had reiterated that there was a clear-cut and well-demarcated sphere of activity in the field of crime detection and crime punishment. The police have a duty to keep vigilance over the law-and-order situation and to prevent crimes. If an offence is alleged to have been committed, it is its bounden duty to investigate into the offences and bring the offender to book. It is also duty bound to collect evidence for the purposes of proving the offence.
The Bench noted that the petitioner moved this petition to thwart investigations, which cannot be allowed by the court as it may lead to interference with the investigations.
Judgment
The present petition was deemed to be of a phishing kind, seeking anticipatory bail, in the garb of directions to the police not to harass the petitioner and his family. Seeing no merit in the present petition, it was accordingly dismissed.
Case: Sheikh Ishrafil vs State (NCT) Of Delhi & Ors.
Citation: W.P.(CRL) 937/2022
Bench: Justice Asha Menon
Decided on: 2nd June 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
