Farmers Protest | Attempt Has Been Made By Punjab Govt To Wash Off Hands From Investigating Matter: High Court On Protestor's Death

The Punjab & Haryana High Court pulled up the Punjab Government for its inaction in investigating the death of Protesting farmer, Shubhkaran Singh who died at the Punjab-Haryana (Khanauri) border during the farmers' 'Dilli Chalo' protest on February 21.

While noting that the Punjab Police lodged Zero FIR by recording the occurrence that took place within the jurisdiction of Police Station Garhi (Haryana), Acting Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Lapita Banerji said, "Thus, an attempt has been made by the State of Punjab to wash its hands off from investigating into the matter."

During the hearing, the Court also questioned Punjab counsel on what grounds "Zero FIR" was lodged by Punjab Police.

Perusing the FIR lodged on the complaint of Singh's father, the Court noted that the death took place on 21.02.2024 and the FIR was only lodged on 28.02.2024.

The Court highlighted that the FIR was lodged by Punjab Police only because on the next day the present matter was listed before the High Court.

"It is a matter of record that the matter was pending before this Court having been adjourned on 20.02.2024 to 29.02.2024. Applications...had also been filed...asking for holding of a judicial enquiry by a Retired High Court Judge assisted by DGP, Punjab regarding the homicide of Subh Karan Singh...the lodging of the FIR at 22:45 hours a day before the hearing of the case would go on to show that the State of Punjab was dilly-dally on the same and only lodged the same once it was aware that the matter was coming up on the next day," the Court said.

The farmers are protesting in demand of a law guaranteeing MSP, among other things. The Court was hearing the plea challenging the alleged obstructive actions of the government and pleas seeking a judicial probe on the death of a protester, along with other related PILs.

Young Minds Exposed To Violent Acts Would Lead To Damaging Effect

On seeing pictures of protest sites provided by the Haryana Government on various dates till February 21, the Court noted that "apart from the younger elements which were armed with lathis and at certain places with swords and spears and sharp-edged weapons, they were also accompanied by women and unfortunately even children were paraded in the front."

Court observed that it is a sad state of affairs that children who should be studying at the schools are being taught and are being exposed to violence when they are not supposed to be.

"Young minds being exposed to violent acts would lead to have a damaging affect on the psychology of such children and apart from that the threat of being injured on account of stone pelting which was taking place in the apparent riot like situation," it added.

Judicial Probe Committee 

The Court said that the investigation regarding the death of Subh Karan- the deceased protestor cannot be entrusted solely either to the State of Punjab or to the State of Haryana for reasons obvious as both the States have several things to cover up.

Consequently, it formed a three-membered committee headed by Justice Jaishree Thakur, Retired Judge of Punjab & Haryana High Court, who will be assisted by Parmod Ban, ADGP, Punjab, and Amitabh Singh Dhillon, ADGP, Haryana.

The Court issued the following directions for the probe.

(i) firstly give a report as to whether which of the police authorities will have jurisdiction to investigate in the death of Subh Karan since the place of occurrence and the death firstly has to be confirmed as one State is shirking its responsibilities whereas the other is yearning to get its hands on the investigation. The cause of death of Subh Karan and from which type of weapon the bullet/pellet emanated would also be within the domain of the Committee.

(ii) The Committee shall also examine the issue whether the force which was used on the dates mentioned above was commensurate with the situation and give its report.

(iii) The issue of compensation to be awarded on account of the death of Subh Karan shall also be worked on. Both the States shall provide all facilities to the Retired High Court Judge who is heading the Committee and the officers nominated shall provide full assistance to her. It will be the discretion of the Retired Judge where to hold the meetings and make site visits in order to ascertain the responsibilities which have been fixed. The State of Haryana shall provide necessary conveyance facility.

(iv) The said exercise be completed within a month. The said Retired Judge will be paid remuneration of Rs.5 lakhs for a period of each month, within one week, to be shared equally by both the States. Both the States shall also ensure that adequate security by way of one P.S.O. each is provided to the Retired High Court Judge who is heading the Committee.

The matter is now listed on April 10.

Title: Uday Pratap Singh Vs. UOI & others

Uday Pratap Singh, petitioner-in person (in CWP-PIL-29-2024). Arvind Seth, Advocte, petitioner-in person (in CWP-PIL-30-2024).

A.P.S. Deol, Sr. Advocate, with Himmat Singh Deol, Advocate,

Advocates A.S. Brar, Arun Goyat, Vishal R.Lamba, Tranum Preet Kaur and Karan Kalia, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CWP-PIL-36-2024).

G.S.Punia, Sr.Advocate, K.S.Sidhu, Sr.Advocate, G.S.Bal, Sr.Advocate with Advocates H.S.Dindsa, Ramandeep Singh, Dilshad S.Gill, K.S.Chawla, G.S.Gurna, Praagbir S.Dhindsa, Kartik Bansal for the petitioner in CWP-PIL-42-2024.

Staya Pal Jain, Addl. Solicitor General of India with Dheeraj Jain, Sr. Standing Counsel, for Union of India.

M.S. Longia, Addl. A.G., Punjab,  Saurav Khurana, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

B.R. Mahajan, Advocate General, Haryana, with Deepak Sabherwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

Amit Jhanji, Sr.Standing Counsel with Jaiveer S. Chandel, Addl. Standing Counsel with Jyoti Kumari, Advocate, for U.T., Chandigarh.

Manish Bansal, P.P., U.T., Chandigarh and Navjit Singh, Advocate, for U.T., Chandigarh.

S.S. Swaich, Advocate, H.S.Bath, Advocate,

Advocates Rajeev Godara, Talim Hussain and S.S. Sandhu for the applicant (in CM-14-15-CWPIL-2024 in CWP-PIL-29-2024).

 Pardeep Kumar Rapria, Advocate, for the applicant-intervener (in CM-22-23-CWPIL-2024 in CWP-PIL-29-2024).

Click here to read/download the order