Legal experts describe framing people under Section 399/402 as ‘human rights violation’

Bhartesh Singh Thakur
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, July 20

Legal experts describe framing people under section 399/402 of Indian Penal Code as a human rights violation. They think that those people are framed under these sections either have pending cases of thefts or burglaries or have been labelled as ‘trouble makers’.

Some have even described sections 399/402 of IPC as a means of preventive detention as accused have to stay in jail for months.

Profile of accused

The recent trial court judgment under section 399/402 of IPC came from a Jind court on March 6, where six people got acquitted – Sunil, Satish, Naman, Balkar, Ravinder and Sashi Pal. They faced trial for more than three years during which five of them remained in jail.

The Tribune studied their history and it turns out that Sunil has 12 cases, including theft, burglary, affray and was also booked under the Arms Act. Satish has eight and Ravinder has 13 cases of theft and burglary pending against them. Satish was once convicted in an affray case for 23 days. Sashi Pal has just one case of burglary pending against him. None of them has been convicted yet in any case.

But, Naman has been convicted in five cases, ranging from drug peddling, rioting, burglary, theft and affray, and has one pending case of burglary. Balkar has two pending cases of planning dacoity and one each for burglary and for an attempt to commit dacoity or robbery. Besides, he has been convicted in two cases of burglaries and one of affray.  

“Human rights violation”

Advocate Vinod Kumar Tripathy, who practices in Panchkula, said, “I have contested cases under section 399/402 as a defence lawyer. In my opinion, thieves along with their friends are falsely implicated under section 399/402. They are usually arrested separately from their homes. It is nothing but sheer misuse of law and amounts to the human rights violation.” 

Defence lawyer Sameer Sethi, who practices in Panchkula, said, “Usually, in the cases under section 399/402 of IPC the police claim to have received a secret report. But the secret informer is not made a witness. We never get to know who gave the information and how. This is a dark area.”

He added, “It is the only section of IPC which prescribes punishment just for planning. So, the police claim most of the cases that they have overheard the accused making the plan, which is unbelievable.”

“Such cases are imposed on people whom the police think are suspects of theft or burglaries or a serious offence like dacoity or robbery. This is the modus operandi of the police. It is also used as a way to get extended police remand through the backdoor. But this is a human rights violation,” he said.       

Dharampal, a former public prosecutor who also served as President of a consumer forum, says, “In reality, these cases are planted. It is a human rights violation. The conviction rate is poor as complainant and Investigating Officer are usually the same police personal and independent witnesses are not joined during arrests and recovery of weapons.”

Another defence lawyer, Manbir Singh Rathi, said he was yet to see any conviction in such cases in his last 15 years of service.

“Under these sections, people are falsely implicated,” he added.

However, SPS Parmar, a former district attorney who now works as a defence lawyer in Panchkula, said, “If independent witnesses are joined for arrest and recovery of weapons, convictions can take place.”

Two former Haryana Police DGPs were contacted for comments but they refused to comment on the matter.