Recently, the Supreme Court dismissed a batch of special leave petitions filed by police officials seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising from the death of a civilian in an alleged fake encounter in Amritsar. The Court also restored proceedings against a Deputy Commissioner of Police, observing that the act of removing vehicle number plates, if proven, cannot be protected as part of official duty.
The case involves the alleged extra-judicial killing of one Mukhjit Singh @ Mukha by a group of police officers. According to the complaint, a police team in plain clothes intercepted a white Hyundai i20 and opened fire at close range, killing the driver. Eyewitnesses claimed to have seen the incident and alleged that a senior officer later arrived and ordered removal of the car's registration plates. Initially, the police lodged a counter FIR claiming self-defence. However, a subsequent Special Investigation Team found this claim to be false and recommended prosecuting the involved officers.
The accused police officials argued that the proceedings should be quashed as they were acting in the discharge of official duty, thereby attracting protection under Section 197 of CrPC. They also contended that the complaint should have been stayed under Section 210 CrPC since a police investigation was already underway. Further, they claimed that the death was a case of mistaken identity, not warranting criminal prosecution.
The Court firmly rejected the petitioners' claims, noting, "The petitioners stand accused of surrounding a civilian vehicle in plain clothes and jointly firing upon its occupant. Such conduct, by its very nature, bears no reasonable nexus to the duties of maintaining public order or effecting lawful arrest."
It clarified that the bar under Section 197 CrPC is not attracted when the alleged act has no direct connection to official duty. Quoting Gauri Shankar Prasad v. State of Bihar, the Court emphasized, "The cloak of official duty cannot be extended to acts intended to thwart justice. An act per se directed to erasing a potential exhibit, if ultimately proved, cannot be regarded as reasonably connected with any bona-fide police duty."
Rejecting the plea under Section 210 CrPC, the Court held that since no progress had been made in the police investigation, the Magistrate was justified in proceeding with the complaint. The Court also observed that the CCTV footage showing the vehicle without number plates raised triable questions, not grounds for quashing at the threshold.
The Top Court dismissed the special leave petitions filed by the accused police officers and upheld the summoning and framing of charges. In a significant reversal, it also allowed the appeal filed by the complainant against the exoneration of the DCP and restored proceedings against him for alleged tampering of evidence. The matter will now proceed to trial in accordance with law.
Picture Source :
