You want us out (of Jat stir probe), not happening: HC to Haryana

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, September 24

The Haryana Government’s attempt to put a veil from the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the police investigations into more than 2,000 FIRs registered in connection with the Jat reservation stir backfired today. Refusing to bring down the curtains on its supervision of the probe, a Division Bench categorically said it would not buckle.

Referring to an affidavit filed by Haryana Secretary (Home Department) Nitin Kumar Yadav, Justices SS Saron and Lisa Gill said the averments suggested that the High Court should refrain from perusing the matter. But in view of the material on record, including the Prakash Singh panel report, it would not be expedient for it not to carry on.

(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)

The assertion came as amicus curiae (friend of the court) Anupam Gupta quoted the affidavit as saying, “When the jurisdictional magistrates are seized of the matter and the investigation is going on, discussions, deliberations or criticism of the investigation seriously hampers the course of law under the CrPC and may not be in the interest of justice. 

“It is respectfully prayed that in view of the same, further supervising such investigation by this High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may not be in the interest of justice”.

The Bench added: “You want us to walk out. But we are not laying our hands off. First you do not want to take action on Parkash Singh panel report, and now you want us out.” 

Haryana also suggested the setting up of a committee under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, with Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Director General of Police and the Advocate General or his representative, as its members to periodically monitor and supervise the investigations in all FIRs.

Appearing on the state’s behalf, Additional Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta said the proposed committee could recommend a CBI probe on finding lacuna in the investigation. 

Mehta also told the Court that the case registered in connection with arson at the instance of Finance Minister’s brother was also being referred to the CBI. Appearing for the FM’s brother, senior advocate RS Rai said the statement by state counsel on the arrest of three people was found to be factually incorrect. 

He added FSL Director, on basis of site visit, expressed opinion that it was a case of vandalism, looting and arson. But FSL report stated kerosene, petrol, diesel or its residues could not be detected. Rai said the material was sent to FSL after a month’s delay.

Responding to the assertions, the state counsel said a SIT had also been constituted. Dubbing the developments as “disheartening”, the Bench said the situation was pathetic. For the first time the high court was informed about the second SIT. So far it was aware of just one SIT for Murthal case.

“The impression was that the Finance Minister’s brother was not getting justice… It is devastating and demoralising. Even during the peak of terrorism in Punjab, the situation was not as bad as it was during the stir.”

Fixing October 22 as the next date, the Bench clarified that the investigation may be conducted in any manner the state likes, provided it was genuine, effective and concrete.

CBI ‘unwilling’ to join in 

The CBI on Saturday expressed its “unwillingness” to probe 2,000 FIRs registered in connection with reservation agitation. The agency’s counsel, Sumeet Goel, said a probe at such a large scale was not possible, citing infrastructural problems. Anguished, the Bench said: “Haryana Police have washed its hands off. How can the culprits be brought to book… how do we retrieve the confidence of public?