Delhi Riots: Court Directs DCP To Sensitize Subordinate Police Officers To Comply With Judicial Orders To Ensure No Delay In Pending Cases
A Delhi Court has directed the DCP, North East district to sensitize the subordinate police officers to comply with the judicial orders and directions of the Trial Court in cases concerning the North East Delhi riots in order to ensure that there is no delay in the pending cases. Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ramesh Kumar, North East district of the Karkardooma Court passed the...
A Delhi Court has directed the DCP, North East district to sensitize the subordinate police officers to comply with the judicial orders and directions of the Trial Court in cases concerning the North East Delhi riots in order to ensure that there is no delay in the pending cases.
Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ramesh Kumar, North East district of the Karkardooma Court passed the order while setting aside an order passed by the CMM which had imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000 on Delhi Police. Additionally, the order had also directed the Commissioner of Police to conduct an inquiry while ordering deduction of the said cost from the salary of responsible officer.
"However, concerned DCP is directed to sensitize subordinate police officers to the effect that the directions of the ld. Trial Court are complied with by them so that, there is no delay in trial of cases, pending before the ld. Trial Court," the Court added.
The Court was dealing with FIR 126/2020 registered at Karawal Nagar Police Station under sec. 147, 148, 149, 427 and 436 IPC. During investigation the said case was clubbed with another complaint of Mohd. Sahib wherein other accused were later chargesheeted.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Arun Kumar Garg vide order dated October 9, 2021. The revision petition was filed by SHO Karawal Nagar.
The CMM Court had ordered for supply of copies of the charge sheet to the accused persons, however, the same could not be supplied because they were found unavailable at their residence. Therefore, vide the impugned order, cost was imposed on the police.
"It is further argued that, even, otherwise, the adjournment was not sought by the State, but same was sought by defence counsel. As such, it is argued that imposition of cost was unwarranted," the Court noted.
The Court further noted that since the directions passed by the Trial Court, regarding supply of copy of charge sheet had already been complied with, there was no ground for imposition of cost upon the Delhi Police and for any inquiry to be conducted by the Commissioner of Police.
Accordingly the revision plea was disposed of.
Title: STATE VS. PINTU @ ANAND KISHORE.