Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Panchkula police get court rap in snatching case

Additional Sessions Judge slams cops for delay in investigation

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Amit Bathla

Advertisement

Tribune News Service

Advertisement

Panchkula, May 17

The court of Additional Sessions Judge Narender Sura took a stern view against the police for not proceeding further in a snatching case wherein their investigation found no evidence against the accused.

A senior police officer, after looking into the matter, had recommended discharge of the accused. 

Advertisement

Court Reprimands officials for misleading it

  • The court also reprimanded police officials, saying that they misled the court to ensure adjournment in the case so that the petitioner remained in custody.
  • Besides, the court also highlighted the differences between two ACP rank officials – ACP (Headquarters) Vijay Deswal and ACP-1 Noopur Bishnoi — with regard to investigation in the case.

The court also reprimanded police officials, saying that they misled the court to ensure adjournment in the case so that the accused remained in custody.

Besides, the court also highlighted the differences between two ACP rank officials – ACP (Headquarters) Vijay Deswal and ACP-1 Noopur Bishnoi — with regard to investigation in the case.

The complaint against Surender was registered on November 22 last year at the behest of Jyoti Singh and her father, whereas the incident took place on November 21 as claimed by the complainant.

On March 18, the father of the accused submitted a complaint to the DCP, Panchkula, seeking a fair investigation.

The inquiry was marked to ACP (Headquarters) Vijay Deswal who in his inquiry report had said that there was no evidence against the accused and directed the Sector 5 police station SHO and Sector 2 police post in-charge to get the accused released as there was no evidence against him.

On March 30, the inquiry report of Deswal was marked to ACP-1 Noopur Bishnoi for further action, which the court in its order said that it was against the rules.

Defence counsel Abhishek Singh Rana expressed doubt over the police investigation and said the evidence was based on the version of the complainant. Moreover, the complainant and the accused were known to each other. He said there was no reason for any non-identification as mentioned in the complaint. It seemed to be a false complaint, he said.

He said an RTI seeking Deswal’s inquiry report had been filed, but no documents had been supplied by the police till today.

As per the recommendations of ACP Noopur Bishnoi, a departmental inquiry was initiated against ASI Narender Singh, who was the investigating officer in the case.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement