‘Higher hierarchy failed to instill discipline in police’: Delhi court asks commissioner why crime records bureau not updated

Perusing the previous involvement report of the accused, the court stated, “Despite so many orders passed by this court, updated status of cases pending against the accused has not been mentioned in the same and as many as in 7 cases, status of accused has been left blank and in 7 cases, accused has been shown to be in judicial custody wherein majority cases pertain to year 2015, one case pertains to year 2012 and one case pertains to year 2020 which seems quite improbable as accused is seeking anticipatory bail and during course of arguments, counsel for accused submitted that accused at present is not in JC (judicial custody).”

The court has asked the Delhi Police Commissioner to explain “why SCRB record is not being updated till date despite the direction of this court way back about one-and-a-half-years ago” with directions to “fix responsibility of officials concerned for failure to comply with the same”.

“It is notable that once punishment of censure has already been awarded to defaulting SHOs and advisory has been issued to all defaulting ACPs as per explanation earlier called from CP, Delhi, and reports furnished by DCP (South) and DCP (Southeast) on behalf of CP, Delhi, in another matter but still, there is no improvement which practically shows that even higher hierarchy in police has failed to instill discipline in Delhi Police,” the court said.

A total of three accused persons were arrested in the matter. Police told the court that they can recover the stolen sarees with the help of the accused. The accused had moved an anticipatory bail application before the court stating that there was a 13-day delay in registering the FIR in the case and apprehends that he may be arrested since the police officers from Defence Colony police station were visiting his home. The court, however, dismissed his anticipatory bail plea.

It, however, pursued the case diaries in this case and noted that the police had opposed the anticipatory bail applications of the other accused in this case and instead of arresting them, made them join the investigation. “It appears that there is something fishy on part of the police… From the conduct of IO, it appears that he is not carrying out investigation in a proper manner and there is something more written on the wall than visible,” the court said.

The court has issued a show cause notice to SHO (Defence Colony) and the investigating officer “for furnishing false information to this court through DCP (South)”.

The court has asked DCP (South) to inquire about role of IO as well as SHO PS Defence Colony in investigation of present case, in view of observations of this court as have come in this order, with a direction to file an Action Taken Report (ATR) against erring officials and file a report in this regard before this court on January 31.