The Madras High Court had observed that the present case was of public nature and involves public interest which so held high while investigating the case. The Court was concerned about free and impartial investigation of the case.
“The sentiments expressed by this court in the present order should be given due weightage by the state, and necessary steps shall be taken and reported before this court”
The above observation was made by the Single-judge bench of Madras High Court, comprising of the Justice N Anand Venkatesh while dealing with the suo motu matter filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the CB-CID to effectively conduct the investigation in Crime No.1 of 2021, duly monitored by this Hon'ble Court and for a further direction to submit periodical status report on the progress made in the investigation before this Court and to complete the investigation as expeditiously as possible.
Court Reasoning & Judgment
The Court analyzed the status report submitted before it by the Investigating Officer. It was imperative to saw that the investigating officer was Inspector General of Police, CBCID and monitored by the Deputy General of Police, CBCID. It was informed by the Respondents Counsel that the accused was put under ‘Compulsory wait’ on which the Court agitated and said that:
“Placing an officer under compulsory wait does not attach any stigma to it and such compulsory wait is resorted to only in cases where a government servant is not able to be accommodated in a suitable post or vacancy for extracting his services. Till such suitable post or vacancy is identified, the government servant is kept under compulsory wait. It is settled law that the period during which a government servant is kept under compulsory wait is construed to be a ‘period spent on duty’. The concerned government servant will be entitled for all the service benefits including allowances during this period of compulsory wait. It is therefore, clear that keeping an officer under compulsory wait can never be construed as a punishment”.
In furtherance to this, the Court also made strict comments on the investigating officer as:
“the investigation is conducted by an officer who is in the rank of Superintendent of Police. A-1 is holding the rank of Special DGP- Law and Order. When such a superior officer who has been kept on a mere compulsory wait, is interrogated by an officer of a subordinate rank, the same will psychologically intimidate the officer from carrying on with the interrogation in a free and fair manner. This is where the suspension of A-1 assumes significance. A-1, coming with his official paraphernalia, even though he is kept under compulsory wait, will jeopardize the investigation from being carried out effectively.”
After perusing all the material facts of the case presented through the Investigating officer the Court was of the opinion that:
“it had been applied to a police officer of a subordinate rank, by now the officer would have been suspended in contemplation of initiation of disciplinary proceedings. This will be done to ensure that the delinquent officer does not misuse his official position and the investigation can be carried out in a free and fair manner. This practice gains more significance when it comes to investigation of a crime of a delinquent officer, belonging to the police force and the fact that this Court has taken upon itself to monitor the investigation in this case shows that it involves public interest, and also the dignity of the police force in the state of Tamil Nadu.”
This petition is post on 23.03.2021 at 10:30 AM for next hearing.
Case Details
Case: W.P.No.6591 of 2021
Petitioner: Suo Motu
Respondent: Government of India & Ors
Counsels for the Respondents: Mr. N. Ramesh, Mr. Jayaprakash Narayanan & Mr. M. Mohamed Muzammil
Quorum: Justice N Anand Venkatesh
Read Order@LatestLaws.com
Share this Document :
Picture Source : https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRFZZr5OfftCnKzBqemUkTKbTPo1JbNZzSjRg&usqp=CAU
