Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Once a Court Declares a Department an Industry Under Section 2(j), State Cannot Raise the Same Objection Again: Gujarat High Court Slams Repetitive Litigation by Irrigation Department “How Could Cheques Issued in 2020 Be Mentioned in a 2019 Contract?”: Delhi High Court Grants Injunction in Forged MOA Case, Slams Prima Facie Fabrication Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix, If Credible, Is Enough to Convict: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Cheque Issued as Security Still Attracts Section 138 NI Act If Liability Exists on Date of Presentation: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity Law of Limitation Binds All Equally, Including the State: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Review Petition with 5743 Days’ Delay Once Selected, All Are Equals: Allahabad High Court Slams State for Withholding Pay Protection From Later Batches of Ex-Servicemen Constables Non-Compliance With Section 42 of NDPS Act Is Fatal to Prosecution: Punjab & Haryana High Court Acquits Two Accused In 160 Kg Poppy Husk Case Unregistered Agreement Creating Right of Way Inadmissible in Evidence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Summary Decree in Partition Suit Denied: Unequivocal Admissions Absent, Full Trial Necessary: Delhi High Court No Court Can Allow Itself to Be Used as an Instrument of Fraud: Delhi High Court Exposes Forged Writ Petition Filed in Name of Unaware Citizen "Deliberate Wage Splitting to Evade Provident Fund Dues Is Illegal": Bombay High Court Restores PF Authority's 7A Order Against Saket College and Centrum Direct Anti-Suit Injunction in Matrimonial Dispute Set Aside: Calcutta High Court Refuses to Stall UK Divorce Proceedings Filed by Wife

Judiciary as Guardian of the Constitution Must Address Failures in Law Enforcement: P&H High Court Demands Action Plan on 79,000 FIRs Pending Beyond Statutory Period

22 January 2025 6:17 PM

By: sayum


Punjab and Haryana High Court expressed severe displeasure over the pendency of a staggering 79,000 First Information Reports (FIRs) in Punjab where investigations have exceeded the statutory period prescribed under the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.). Justice Sandeep Moudgil, in a detailed order, called for immediate action and accountability from the state authorities, including the Director General of Police (DGP), Punjab.

The Court was hearing CRM-47174-2024, an application seeking the revival of the main petition (CRM-M-37149-2021) concerning an investigation delay in FIR No. 36 of 2021, registered under Sections 307, 379-B, 34 IPC, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur.

Three Years of Delay in Investigation Sparks Court's Ire

The petitioner sought cancellation of bail granted to one of the accused, alleging that the investigation remained incomplete after 3½ years despite repeated court orders. The investigation pertained to a case involving gunfire attacks and attempted murder.

The Court observed that despite its previous order on September 17, 2024, requiring the completion of the investigation within one month, the police failed to act in a timely manner. The Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Ferozepur, Mrs. Saumya Mishra, appeared in Court but failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay.

Court Slams State for "Deliberate and Intentional Disregard" of Orders

Justice Moudgil termed the delay a "deliberate and intentional disregard to judicial dignity" and criticized the police for their laxity in fulfilling assurances given to the Court. The affidavit filed by the SSP revealed no tangible efforts to apprehend the accused or utilize modern investigative tools like tracking mobile locations or monitoring financial transactions.

Even more striking was the State's submission that the investigation had been rushed to file a chargesheet on December 9, 2024, just days after the hearing notice for the instant application was issued. Despite this, one of the accused, Bansi Lal, remains at large, and the affidavit failed to detail substantive steps taken to trace him.

A Broader Systemic Concern: 79,000 FIRs Pending Investigation

In addition to this specific case, the Court highlighted the alarming backlog of FIRs across Punjab. A district-wise report submitted by DGP Gaurav Yadav revealed over 79,000 FIRs pending investigation despite the expiry of the statutory 90-day period for filing a final report.

Justice Moudgil noted: "The judiciary serves as a guardian of the Constitution and must address failures in law enforcement, particularly when such failures affect the public's faith in the legal system."

The Court observed that the lack of timely investigations and filings reflects poorly on the efficiency of law enforcement and undermines public trust in the administration of justice.

Judicial Directive: Action Plan Required to Address Investigation Backlog

The High Court directed the DGP, Punjab, to submit a comprehensive Action Plan within two weeks to address the backlog of pending investigations. The Action Plan must include:

Details of FIRs: Dates of FIR registration, statutory time limits for investigation, and the elapsed period.

 

Proposed Deadlines: A timeline for completing investigations and filing chargesheets in the pending cases.

District-Wise Breakdown: Statistical data from all districts to ensure transparency.

The Court emphasized that "accountability and transparency are integral to enhancing public trust in law enforcement."

The Court also addressed concerns raised by the petitioner regarding the accused Bansi Lal, who remains absconding. It questioned the quality of the investigation and the effectiveness of efforts to locate the accused, noting that "standard excuses of conducting raids are insufficient without using scientific methods."

Justice Moudgil reiterated that "effective investigation is the backbone of justice delivery, and any laxity compromises not just individual cases but the entire legal system."

The matter has been adjourned to January 30, 2025, for further consideration. The State has been instructed to ensure a more detailed affidavit addressing the specific delays in this case and a broader systemic response to the investigation backlog.

The Court's call for transparency and accountability underscores its commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring timely justice for citizens.

Next Hearing: January 30, 2025

Latest Legal News