DGP, Home Secy of Haryana, Punjab, UT summoned by HC

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 6

In an exceptional order, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (HC) has summoned the Home Secretaries and the Directors-General of Police (DGP) of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh after taking cognisance of non-production of accused and witnesses during trial. 

The Bench ordered the Director Prosecution of the two states and the UT to be present before the Bench.

Justice Rajbir Sehrawat asserted it had repeatedly come to the court’s notice that either the accused or the witnesses were not produced before the trial court. Even bailable and non-bailable warrants against witnesses were not executed by serving officials, said Justice Sehrawat. In case, warrants were against police officials, cops were found hundred per cent lacking in execution of such warrants, added Justice Sehrawat.

“This problem is found to be more acute in case witnesses happen to be official witnesses, particularly, if witnesses are higher rank police officers. Even coercive orders like attaching salary of such officers, passed by the trial court are not having any effect in making such police officials appear as witnesses,” said Justice Sehrawat.

Taking up a bunch of petitions filed by Kaka Singh and others, the Bench added that the trial court’s time was as such wasted. It also infringed the right to life and liberty of the accused. The problem was not unique to any one state. The malaise was found spreading throughout Punjab, Haryana and even Chandigarh.

“This court intends to issue directions to trial courts to use the provisions of CrPC for devising alternate methods of ensuring the execution of warrants against police officials, like, directing warrants against such police officials to persons or authorities other than the police,” Justice Sehrawat added.

Referring to the case in hand Justice Sehrawat asserted that the record showed that officials as higher in rank as Superintendent of Police were not caring for the warrants issued by the court issued for their appearance as prosecution witnesses. It appeared that so far as the conduct of the trial was concerned it was considered to be a baby of none, Justice Sehrawat added. The impression given was that nobody was responsible and accountable for the conduct of the prosecution and for ensuring the presence of the witnesses and the accused, Justice Sehrawat said.

The problem deserved serious attention, Justice Sehrawat added while adjourning the hearing to February 19 next.