New Delhi, Sep 19 (PTI) A court here on Monday set aside the order of a magisterial court to register an FIR against a former Station House Office (SHO) of Pandav Nagar.
The Sessions Court, however, said the magisterial court could proceed in the matter as per law by recording pre-summoning evidence.
During the pre-summoning evidence, the complainant must bring material on record to support the allegations. Based on this, the court then decides whether the prima facie offence is made against the accused for summoning them.
The court was hearing a revision petition filed by the then SHO of Pandav Nagar, Vidhyadhar Singh, against whom the magisterial court had on June 24, 2022 ordered registration of FIR. Earlier, the wife of a deceased constable had moved court alleging her husband Brij Lal died by suicide by hanging on September 6, 2021 because of harassment by the former SHO.
“…The impugned order dated June 24, 2022, shall not sustain and deserves to be set aside. However, the trial court may proceed in the matter by recording pre-summoning evidence and further proceed as per law,” Additional Sessions Judge Deepak Jagotra said. The court noted the observation of the magisterial court, as per which the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) concerned had conducted “a roving inquiry or investigation” against the accused official without registration of FIR, thereby giving him a clean chit. The court said, from the documents placed on record, it was clear that the ACP concerned had conducted a departmental inquiry into the matter and recorded the statement of 19 witnesses. “The said report cannot be thrown into the dustbin merely on the premise that the ACP had done a roving inquiry,” the court said. The court further noted that the magisterial court was not satisfied with the manner in which the higher police officials had dealt with the matter and asked for the appointment of a senior police official, preferably not connected with the affairs of Pandav Nagar police station, for investigation of the present case.
“In such a scenario where the trial court is not satisfied with the overall conduct of the police officials of Pandav Nagar, it is all the more important, desirable and necessary that him being the magistrate of the concerned authority shall record the evidence of the witnesses and is the best person to form an opinion or conclusion if the alleged accused be summoned and tried as per law or not,” the court said. The court also said the solution in the matter was not registration of FIR but to proceed under the relevant provision of law to ascertain the real truth of the matter. “In the present case, all the evidence is available before the applicant and no custodial interrogation is required against the revisionist,” the court added. PTI MNR SK SK
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.