High Court raps Haryana Police for not investigating murder case in 'pragmatic' manner

Tribune News Service

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, February 24

More than a year after a woman specifically named her husband in her dying declaration, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has rapped the Haryana Police for apparently not carrying out the investigation in a pragmatic and meaningful manner.

The admonition came as the Bench directed Sirsa Superintendent of Police and Deputy Superintendent of Police to appear in person before the court.

Shielding the petitioner

The background clearly gives an impression that the state police officers have tried to shield the petitioner specifically named in the dying declaration by the victim. —Justice Manoj Bajaj, High Court

Justice Manoj Bajaj also issued a notice of motion to the State of Haryana and other respondents for February last week. The Bench was assisted in the matter by counsel Aditya Sanghi. Taking up the matter, Justice Bajaj observed that the petitioner’s wife died of burn injuries on November 8, 2020. The investigation was carried out after the registration of FIR for murder and common intention under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC at the Rania police station in Sirsa district.

The petitioner’s mother was sent to face trial in accordance with the final investigation report, dated March 5, 2021. The petitioner was, meanwhile, declared innocent. But the trial Court exercised its jurisdiction by summoning the husband as an additional accused after the commencement of the trial, leaving the petitioner with the apprehension of arrest.

Justice Bajaj added that it was conceded by the petitioner’s counsel during the course of the hearing that the FIR was lodged on the basis of the wife’s dying declaration recorded on November 8, 2020, in the presence of Sirsa Chief Judicial Magistrate. But the petitioner was neither arrested, nor sought pre-arrest bail after the registration of the case, though he was associated with the investigation and was declared innocent on the basis of his minor daughter’s statement under Section 164 of the CrPC on August 4, 2021.

Justice Bajaj also took note of the counsel’s contention that the petitioner was not involved in the alleged crime. “Prima facie, the investigation in the present case does not seem to be done in a pragmatic and meaningful manner and the background clearly gives an impression that the state police officers have tried to shield the petitioner specifically named in the dying declaration by the victim”.

Justice Bajaj added that the final report stood filed on March 5, 2021. There was apparently no justification for recording the statement of the petitioner’s daughter under Section 164 on August 4, 2021. In any case, the statement at that stage could not have been given preference to the victim’s dying declaration while declaring him innocent.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.

#haryana police