Probes Pending For Years: Allahabad HC Questions UP Police's Economic Offences Wing Over Slackness, Seeks DG's Affidavit

A bench of Justice Samit Gopal criticised the EOW for its apparent "slackness" in handling critical economic offences, as it noted that in matters being investigated by the EOW, the probes are kept pending for years and years.

In this regard, the Court directed the Director General EOW (Prashant Kumar -I) to file his personal affidavit by December 16 and inform the Court as to why the EOW is lagging in its investigations and why the investigations have been pending for years.

The Court has also asked the DG about the reason for it, the persons responsible for it, and the steps he took to ensure the expeditious disposal of investigations.

The Court passed this order while dealing with an anticipatory bail plea moved by Mohd Haroon in 2019 regarding a matter under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Noting that the probe in the matter has remained pending for a long time, another bench (in February this year) summoned the Investigating Officer with the case diary and directed that its order be communicated to the DGP, UP.

In March this year, the Court granted the state government four weeks' time to file a counter-affidavit in the matter.

Now, when the matter came up for hearing before Justice Gopal's bench on November 8, almost 8 months after the state was asked to file a counter, the single judge noted that no counter had been filed. Even the state's counsel did not get any response from the office of UP DGP.

Taking note of the state of affairs and noting that investigations by EOW are kept pending for years in many cases, the Court requested the Government Advocate remain present in Court on the next date.

Further, the Court also called for an affidavit of the UP DGP as aforesaid and listed the matter for December 16.

Importantly, the Court also directed that till the next date of listing or till the submission of the police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court, whichever is earlier, in the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/-

The Court further directed the Investigating Officer to conclude the investigation of the present case expeditiously and independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by the Court.

Advocate Mohd. Naushad Ahmad Khan appeared for the applicant. Advocate Ajay Singh appeared for the state government.

Case title - Mohd Haroon vs. State of U.P

Click Here To Read/Download Order