Expressing strong disagreement with the manner in which the case was handled by the Uttar Pradesh Police, Supreme Court Justice Surya Kant remarked that the police in Uttar Pradesh were “enjoying power”. “He needs to be sensitized”. The judge further commented that the state police were “entering dangerous territory”. Warned that if the petitioner is touched before the court, strict orders will be passed. A division bench of Justices Kant and Ujjal Bhuiyan heard the case and observed that the petitioner, against whom multiple FIRs are registered, fears that if he appears for investigation, a fresh case will be registered against him.
Therefore, it was directed that the petitioner should comply with any notice served on his mobile phone by the investigating officer. However, he will not be taken into police custody without the prior permission of the court. Earlier, the Court refused to entertain the plea for quashing of the FIR (under sections 323, 386, 447, 504 and 506 of the IPC). However, in view of the other cases registered against the petitioner-Anurag Dubey and the nature of the allegations, notice was issued to the State of Uttar Pradesh as to why anticipatory bail should not be granted. The Court stayed the arrest of the petitioner in the relevant FIR, provided that he joins and cooperates in the investigation.
Senior Advocate Rana Mukherjee (for the State of Uttar Pradesh) said that following the previous order of the Court, a notice was sent to the petitioner, but he did not appear before the investigating officer. Sent an affidavit instead. Hearing this, Justice Kant remarked that the petitioner was probably living in fear that the UP Police would file another false case against him. “He should not appear because he knows that you will file another false case. Arrest him there. You can tell your DGP that as soon as he (Dubey) is touched, we will pass such a strict order that He will remember it his whole life.
Every time you bring a new FIR against him! How many cases can the prosecution retain? It is very easy to make allegations of land grabbing. Someone who has bought by registered sale deed, you call him a land grabber! Is this a civil dispute or a criminal dispute? We are just pointing out what dangerous territory your police are entering. They are enjoying it! Who would want to miss out on power? Now you are assuming the power of police, now you are assuming the power of civil court! So you are enjoying it.” Touched that his brief would go back to the state of UP, Justice Kant said that he, as an officer of the Court, has known him for many years. However, the point is that the police How to be sensitized.
The bench also asked Dubey's lawyer why he was not appearing. The lawyer replied that he had no instructions in this regard. However, Dubey gave his mobile number to the police officials, so that they could inform him when and where he had to appear. At this point Justice Bhuyan asked Mukherjee about the mode of communication by which Dubey was asked to appear. When told that a letter was sent, the division bench remarked that nowadays everything has become digital. Suggested that a message be sent to Dubey's mobile (which would be on all the time), giving details of where he was to appear.
Warning the police officers not to arrest Dubey himself, Justice Kant said, “Let him join the investigation but do not arrest him. If you feel that arrest is required in a particular case then come and tell us that There are reasons. But if police officers are doing this, you take it from us, we will not only suspend them, but they will lose something else too.”
Comments are closed.