Improper Investigations Rampant, Culprits Going Unpunished: Jharkhand High Court Orders Training Of Police Officers
The Jharkhand High Court recently expressed its displeasure at the "appalling state of affairs" in the State due to improper investigations being carried out by Police officers in crimes, leading to several culprits going scot free.Justice Subhash Chand thus ordered the Director, Judicial Academy (Jharkhand) to prepare a scheme to impart training to the Police Investigating Officers and...
The Jharkhand High Court recently expressed its displeasure at the "appalling state of affairs" in the State due to improper investigations being carried out by Police officers in crimes, leading to several culprits going scot free.
Justice Subhash Chand thus ordered the Director, Judicial Academy (Jharkhand) to prepare a scheme to impart training to the Police Investigating Officers and to prepare the schedule programme of the same.
The Director General of Police is directed to provide the list of the Police Investigating Officers of the State for the purpose of undergoing training to conduct the effective and complete investigation. Requisite steps have to be taken in compliance within a month.
"This Court, while exercising its bail jurisdiction, often found that the investigation by the police is not conducted in fair and proper manner and the real culprit goes scot-free i.e., unpunished," the Court observed.
"In the case in hand, the best evidence was the injured himself, who sustained grievous injury on the vital part of the body i.e., head; but the Investigating Officer (in short 'I.O.') of this case had not recorded the statement of the injured. Due to latches on the part of the I.O., the statement of the victim was not recorded, which might have shown the complicity of the applicant in commission of the alleged offence."
Counsel for applicant argued that as per victim's injury report, the nature of injury is grievous in nature but there is no evidence of assault against the applicant. The statement of injured was not recorded by the Investigating Officer. Infact, he argued that the testimony of informant is not admissible being hearsay. He also informed the Court that the applicant had been languishing in jail since 1st February, 2022.
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for state argued that the victim (father of the informant) had sustained grievous injury on the vital part of the body i.e., head. It was further submitted that the informant had supported the prosecution story but the statement of victim was not recorded and there is no other eye-witness of the occurrence.
"The charge-sheet, in the case in hand, has been filed and the concerned Magistrate whose duty was to monitor the investigation in view of Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure had not exercised his power in light of the case law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe v. Hemant Yashwant Dhage & Others reported in (2016) 6 SCC 277 ." Court said
Thus, a direction was issued that Judicial Magistrates of the State monitor the investigation, so that the proper and fair investigation may be conducted by the Investigating Officers.
With regard to bail in this matter, the Court directed the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of 30,000/-.
Case Title: Suresh Yadav Versus The State of Jharkhand
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Jha) 45
Click Here To Read/Download Order