DGPs to issue instructions that in cases in which preliminary inquiries are conducted, same be concluded within prescribed period of 6 weeks:Punjab & Haryana HC

Read Order- Jagjit Kaur VS. State of Punjab

LE Staff

Chandigarh, September 3, 2021: While making the order of grant of interim bail to the petitioner absolute, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has also passed directions to the  Director Generals of Police, Punjab, Haryana and U.T., Chandigarh, to issue instructions that in cases in which preliminary inquiries are conducted the same be concluded within the prescribed period of six weeks and in case any unreasonable delay occurs in conclusion of such preliminary inquiries appropriate departmental action be taken against the defaulting police officer/official.

These directions of the High Court came pursuant to the filing of a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail in a case pertaining to an FIR registered under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Sadar Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

It was alleged in the FIR that the accused-Jagjit Kaur (the petitioner in the present case) had received amount of Rs.71,800 from Ramveer Singh but instead of depositing the same in his post office account criminally misappropriated the same by dishonestly retaining the amount with her.

Earlier, the petitioner’s counsel had submitted that the petitioner had been falsely implicated at the instance of senior officials of the Postal Department in order to settle some personal score/grudge in connivance with Ramveer Singh and the petitioner deposited the amount on December 17,2015.  

While reiterating these submissions it was also contended that in compliance with the order dated January 22,2020, the petitioner had joined the investigation and she might be granted anticipatory bail as her custodial interrogation was not required in the case.

The Bench of Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi opined that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation against the petitioner, the fact that custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required in the case and there was no material to justify the apprehension of the petitioner fleeing from justice or tampering with evidence or criminally intimidating the prosecution witnesses, the petitioner deserved the grant of anticipatory bail.

The Bench also dealt with the issue of delayed registration of the FIR.

The Court specifically mentioned that the FIR in question was registered after more than two years and four months from the date of submission of first complaint. In view of observations in Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt. of U.P. And others, the Director General of Police, Punjab, Haryana and U.T., Chandigarh respectively were directed to submit their affidavits giving information regarding the status of preliminary inquiries.

The affidavits mentioned that 3654 preliminary inquiries were pending beyond six weeks, 65 preliminary inquiries were pending for more than seven days in the year 2019 and 346 preliminary inquiries were pending for more than seven days in the year 2019.

Keeping these aspects into consideration the Bench stated, “the Director Generals of Police, Punjab, Haryana and U.T., Chandigarh respectively are directed to issue instructions that in cases in which preliminary inquiries are conducted the same be concluded within the prescribed period of six weeks and in case any unreasonable delay occurs in conclusion of such preliminary inquiries appropriate departmental action be taken against the defaulting police officer/official.”

It has also been held that a copy of this order be supplied to the State Counsel for States of Punjab and Haryana and U.T., Chandigarh and be also sent to the Director Generals of Police, Punjab, Haryana and U.T., Chandigarh for ensuring requisite compliance with the same.