‘Deplorable’: HC raps Haryana Police for wrong call details in murder case

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has admonished the Haryana Police for filing incorrect electronic evidence while opposing a bail plea filed by a murder accused. Justice Sandeep Moudgil termed the act “deplorable and condemnable” and observed that such a callous approach could not be condoned when a person’s liberty was involved.

“There was a callous approach on the part of the investigating agency/State while apprising the court by filing the status report of the investigation on a specific direction while considering the prayer for regular bail to the petitioner,” Justice Moudgil asserted while allowing bail to the accused in a murder case registered in Jind in 2023.

Justice Moudgil asserted: “Such a callous approach is deplorable and condemnable not merely because of any inconvenience caused to the court, but the law and investigating agencies are expected to exercise the highest level of responsibility when a person’s life and liberty — who is confined in jail — is concerned against whom no corroborative evidence has emerged.”

The Bench, during the course of hearing, was told that the accused seeking regular bail was arrested in the FIR registered on June 22, 2023, at Julana police station in Jind district under Sections 302, 201, and 34, IPC, and Section 25(1A) of the Arms Act. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that he had been roped in the case, though his “location could not be determined from the mobile number used by him”.

Taking up the matter, the court directed the State to verify the mobile location details. The Bench was then told that the call details of the petitioner and the victim were procured. It was found that the location, call details records and ID of some another mobile number, with fifth digit different, were procured and annexed with an earlier affidavit dated and status report.

“Thereafter correct and factual position explaining the location and call detail records of the mobile number of the deceased was submitted in the court,” it was added. In an additional affidavit, the police acknowledged the mistake and tendered an “unconditional and unqualified apology”.

After perusing the details, Justice Moudgil asserted a wrong mobile number was referred to in the earlier affidavit and the DSP concerned had also tendered his conditional and unqualified apology for inconvenience caused to the court.

Allowing the bail plea, the court asserted that corroborative evidence had not emerged against the petitioner, while emphasising the critical role of accuracy and diligence in the criminal justice process, especially where personal liberty was involved.