"Shoddy, Compromised Investigation Wedded To Checkmates At Every Stage Of Trial": J&K High Court Quashes FIR, Orders Fresh Probe

“A shoddy and compromised investigation of and in a criminal case is wedded from inception to checkmates at every stage of trial and fated to be failure be it at its very inception or at the end”, the court added.

A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti made this observation in the context of a tangled web of allegations, counter-allegations, and compromised police work that unfolded in three interconnected criminal cases, shedding light on the critical role of meticulous investigation in the pursuit of justice.

Three petitions came to be filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging police investigations and subsequent legal proceedings arising from FIRs lodged by the involved parties. In the instant case Ajay Kumar Sareen, a probationary public prosecutor and Civil Judge designate accused Rohit Krishan Bhat of an assault, and, conversely, allegations of harassment, stalking, and assault leveled against Sareen by Ragini Rajput, the wife of Bhat.

The first FIR, lodged on January 23, 2024, accused Rohit Bhat of attacking Sareen with an iron object, resulting in injuries. Days later, a counter-FIR was filed by Rajput, alleging Sareen's persistent harassment and assault.

Amid these conflicting narratives, glaring flaws in the police investigations came to light, prompting judicial scrutiny as Justice Bharti highlighted the procedural discrepancies and factual inconsistencies that marred the integrity of the investigations.

Commenting on the compromised Investigation and procedural lapses that came to fore on the scrutiny of the record Justice Bharti emphasized that a compromised investigation fails to serve justice and remarked,

"A final police report, known in popular practice & parlance as challan, under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973… if presented bearing lame and loose-end facts based narrative… renders itself self-exposed to suffer a reality check… be it before the very criminal court before which it gets presented and filed or even when same happens to come under scanner of this court's inherent jurisdiction."

Observing that the present cases exemplified abuse of legal processes, with the protagonists resorting to fabricated narratives the court stated,

"The present three cases are live exhibit of an abuse of process of law with relish by resort to unabashed fabrication of and flirtation with facts… equally nursed and prompted by dereism of investigative approach by the Police Station Janipur, Jammu, acting and conducting as if investigation of a criminal case is an exercise in theatrics with superficiality."

Criticising the lack of coherence in evidence collection and case preparation as noted in the case at hand the court observed,

“ .. that the investigation of a criminal case is not meant to be exercise in theatrics with superficiality involving set standard compilation of papers by stitching of bunch of so called examinational statement/s of person/s to be cited as prosecution witness/es, seizure memo/s, arrest memo/s etc., least mindful and bothered as to whether purported fact/s, as stated in a final police report… is/are leading and connecting, immediately and/or intermediately, with relevant fact/s."

Noting the delay in filing complaints and presenting evidence, which weakened the credibility of both parties the court said that the purported exercise at the end of Ragini Rajput that FIR No. 0024 of 2024 got registered against Ajay Kumar Sareen seems to be a made-up narrative holding no persuasive effect to have any taker for that and all seems to be an afterthought to get the FIR registered in the matter.

Highlighting the police's failure to consolidate investigations of interconnected FIRs, Justice Bharti remarked,

"…for the same very day's incident of 23.01.2024 with respect to two versions relatable to three actors… two simultaneous but opposite side looking investigations by different investigating officers got into effect, first FIR followed by second, least bothering the SHO Police Station Janipur to spare his consideration to the fact that the investigation relatable to two allegedly reported incidents in terms of FIR No. 0020 of 2024 and FIR No. 0024 of 2024, involving a serving prosecution officer/a prospective civil judge junior division and a woman complaining of wrong to her person at the hands of said prosecution officer, ought to have been taken either by himself under his own investigation”

Underscoring that justice cannot be served through compromised investigations, the court emphasized that the role of the police is to generate factual and unbiased reports that provide a clear basis for prosecution or defense. In the absence of such diligence, the accused and the victims alike are left at the mercy of a flawed system, which neither upholds justice nor serves the larger public interest, the bench reasoned.

After examining the deficiencies in the investigations, the Court quashed the police reports in both FIRs. It ordered a fresh investigation into FIR No. 20 of 2024 to be conducted by Police Station Pacca Danga within two months. FIR No. 24 of 2024 was transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) with instructions to complete the probe within 90 days.

The Court further directed that any delay in completing the investigations must be justified by the investigating authorities through a formal application for an extension. To ensure transparency, the Police Station Janipur was instructed to transfer all case records to the CBI.

Case Title: Ajay Kumar Sareen Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 357

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment