Supreme Court Asks Telangana DGP To File Affidavit On Plugging Communication Gaps Between Prosecution & Govt Counsel

The Supreme Court on Friday (October 4) directed the Director General of Police (SGP), Telangana, to file an affidavit on the streamlining of communication and plug loopholes in gaps between the Counsel for State of Telangana and Prosecution regarding accessing information on criminal cases in court related matters.

The Court today expressed that there is a "recurring" phenomenon witnessed from the State of Telangana where there is often miscommunication between the prosecution and Telangana Government Counsel pertaining to information about criminal cases.

This arises from an order of the Supreme Court passed on October 1, where it sought information from counsel for the State of Telangana on the chargesheets filed in the present case.

The bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti was hearing a plea filed by Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) leader Vatti Janaiah Yadav who had moved the Apex Court last year against the alleged criminal prosecution by the then Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) led Government in Telangana after Yadav made a political switch from BRS to BSP.

When asked about the specific filing dates of the chargesheet, the State of Telangana, was unable to provide this information. The court expressed surprise at this lack of knowledge, and summoned the DGP, due to the lack of communication between the prosecution and the Government counsel.

Today, the DGP appeared virtually and submitted that there was a lapse on the part of the officers for not mentioning the dates on the chargesheet and informed the Court that proceedings would be initiated against the concerned officer responsible for the lapse.

When the Court asked DGP if "when instruction is given by you to your Government counsels, and then let's say chargesheet has been filed, the information in the chargesheet will also not contain connected dates or that chargesheet was filed on so and so dates", DGP replied, "there is a lack of information and this will not happen again."

However, the Court expressed displeasure at the answer and stated that Telangana has a command and control centre and whatever happens in one police Station, the DGP "in a click of a button will be in a position to find out everything".

Justice Bhatti said: "Have you found out where the matter has gone wrong?"

DGP replied: "Yes sir. We found out. Yes, the information was not there. So, definitely there was a lapse."

The Court asked him to clearly state whose fault is it for not providing the information. DGP accepted that since the information was not given to the State Counsel, the police officers were at fault.

Telangana's counsel informed the Court that two affidavits have been filed containing details including dates of chargesheets filed in compliance with the October 1 order. The counsel also apologised to the Court and submitted that there was a miscommunication and the same will not be repeated again.

Justice Bhatti said: "One thing with the experience I have, I must tell you, we are not getting proper assistance in these criminal cases from your State."

He concluded: "There is one more reason why we wanted your officer to be here is that his argument was completely to the political dictate. You have been accepting FIRs, you have been filing chargesheets. That is why we sought the date of chargesheet, and within how many days you are filing chargesheet and what is the line of investigation have following in this matter. Let him file an affidavit."

Case Details: VATTI JANAIAH v. STATE OF TELANGANA| Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 12098/2023