Follow Us
Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, May 21
The Punjab and Haryana High Court today rapped Moga Senior Superintendent of Police and a Station House Officer for “dereliction in duty” before directing Home Secretary to initiate disciplinary proceedings against them.
The admonition during the hearing of appeals filed in criminal cases came after the Bench of Justice Rajiv Sharma and Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu was told that the SSP and the SHO of Mehna police station had failed to provide the details of period spent by convicts in custody with or without remission.
The Bench about 10 days back had directed six convicts to appear before the court for hearing them on the quantum of sentence in a culpable homicide not amounting to murder case under Section 304, Part I of the IPC.
They were initially convicted for murder and other offences by a Moga Additional Sessions Judge in September, 2003. But the need to hear them afresh on quantum of sentence arose after the Bench partly allowed their appeal and converted conviction of the appellants under Section 302 for murder to Section 304, Part I.
In sequel to the directions issued by the court, the convicts appeared before the Bench on their own during the resumed hearing of the case. Punjab Additional Advocate-General SPS Tinna stated that a communication was sent to the SSP Moga on May 15, with a copy to the SHO. But neither the SSP, nor the SHO came forward to provide the requisite information.
Speaking for the Bench, Justice Sharma asserted it was serious dereliction in duty on part of both the SSP and the SHO. The court had time and again observed that the custody certificates were of utmost importance to ascertain the period spent by the convicts in custody with or without remissions while imposing sentence.
Justice Sharma added: “Since the cops have not supplied the requisite information and failed to comply with the direction of this court in letter and spirit by furnishing the custody certificates of the convicts despite the communication having been sent to them in time, their conduct evidently appears to be willful and deliberate”.
Modifying the sentence to seven years rigorous imprisonment, Justice Sharma also directed the arrest of a “missing” convict for being lodged in the jail to undergo the remaining portion of term.
1
9