Routine Transfer Of Cases To CBI Overburdens It, Demoralises State Police Officers : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently observed that routine transfer of cases from state authorities to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) overburdens 'premier investigating agency' of the country and has a 'very serious demoralizing impact' on officers of the state police.

The observation came while the Court was dealing with State of West Bengal's challenge to a Calcutta High Court order, which directed CBI probe into the allegations of custodial torture of 2 women arrested amid protests that took place in West Bengal after the RG Kar Medical College rape-murder incident.

"The High Courts don't understand how many matters they are going to dump like this. These are matters where a lot of sensitivity is there. These are matters which require immediate investigation and you keep on overburdening an agency which is already dealing with so many important matters in the country..." orally remarked Justice Surya Kant.

"Routine entrustment of investigation of matters to CBI not only leads to burden on the premier investigating agency of the country, it has very serious demoralizing impact on the officers of the state police", recorded the bench of Justices Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan in its order, constituting a Special Investigation Team of senior state police officers not belonging to the state to proceed further with the investigation. 

In the facts of the case, Justice Kant questioned counsels for respondents about the impact that transfer of investigation to CBI may have on state IPS officers: "Look at the impact. The entire IPS cadre of the state, what they will think? That they are incompetent, inefficient and under some kind of invisible pressure and they can't hold a fair investigation into this kind of offense?"

In support of the constitution of the SIT of senior state police officers, the judge further said, "it is giving opportunity to the officers who are there...that you please come out with the truth, which must be absolutely unfiltered and which is something acceptable to the system. Let's give a chance to them. Otherwise, other options are always there".

Background

Statedly, the 2 women were participants in the Nabanna Abhijan march, held following the RG Kar Medical College incident. During this protest, they allegedly made objectionable remarks against the minor daughter of Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee.

A complaint was filed at the Diamond Harbour police station and the police booked the 2 women under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the POCSO Act and the Information Technology Act. After they were arrested, they levelled allegations of assault in custody by police officers.

Initially, a Single Bench of the High Court ordered a CBI probe into the allegations. In appeal, a Division Bench upheld the single bench's order, noting that medical reports by the correctional home indicated custodial torture.

"The fact that has greatly disturbed our mind is the discrepancy in the recording of the medical state of the petitioners by different authorities. The POCSO judge ordered for judicial custody of the accused. The medical officer of the correctional home recorded hematomas in legs and back, and pain. This recording cannot be disputed due to the documents presented. Shockingly, when the accused earlier was produced before the government medical hospital, Diamond Harbour, it was said that there was no external injury. This shows a clear discrepancy. It is evidently clear that the trauma has occurred to the writ petitioner when they were in police custody."

It was further stated that due to the nature of the incident, allowing the police to investigate the same, would lead to a conflict of interest.

Against the Division Bench's order, the State of West Bengal approached the Supreme Court.

Appearance: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal (for West Bengal); Senior Advocates Narendra Hooda and Ranjit Kumar (for respondents)

Case Title: THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS Versus REBEKA KHATUN MOLLA @ REBEKA MOLLA AND ORS., SLP(Crl) No. 15481/2024