Can't Compromise Fair Investigation To Protect Reputation Of Officers: HP High Court Refuses To Recall Order Removing DGP Sanjay Kundu

The Himachal Pradesh High Court on Tuesday refused to recall its order removing IPS officer Sanjay Kundu from the post of Director General of Police, to prevent any interference with the probe into a businessman's complaint apprehending threat to his life by a former IPS officer and a practising lawyer. The State has posted Kundu as the Principal Secretary of the Ayush Department. He is due to retire in 3 months.

The case revolves around a business dispute between Nishant Sharma, the complainant, and a Senior Advocate, an "old acquaintance" of Kundu. While Kundu claims he only had a cordial telephonic conversation with Sharma, motivated by principles of police led mediation, Sharma claims that Kundu threatened him.

Kundu had earlier approached the Supreme Court against the removal order but the SC directed him to approach the High Court seeking recall.

A division bench led by Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua said it is difficult to decide whose version is true but, Kundu's attempt to mediate in a civil dispute between two parties was outside the scope of his duty as a senior police officer.

It also noted that specific instance of Kundu intimidating the officer investigating the case had come to light and thus, it wouldn't be safe to let him continue on the post.

"Should this Court, under the pretext of protecting the reputation of the officers concerned, forget it's constitutional responsibility of ensuring fair investigation in the matter? We think not. There cannot be a fair trial without fair investigation."

The Court also dismissed the plea filed by Shalini Agnihotri, who was transferred outside the post of Kangra's Superintendent of Police. It said sufficient material in form of CCTV data analysis (of the alleged attack on Sharma) was available with the investigators but the same was not used. It added, Agnihotri being the Superintendent was expected to show some diligence and sensitivity. The bench also took exception to her defence that she was occupied celebrating important festivals at the time. "How a responsible police officer can take such a plea when there is serious threat to life of a citizen, we are unable to understand," it remarked.