Kailo Devi vs S.H.O.Police Station Jakhal

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.

This case has been taken suo moto by this Court by Hon''ble Mr. Justice Amarjit Chaudhary during his inspection of Hisar district on 23.2.1995.

This case is a classical example how the rule of law is prevailing in the State. There cannot be any surprise if one feels whether it is under the rule of law or under the rule of jungle. A case of petty theft had been reported to the police. The complainant in the said case named two maid servants working in his household as suspects. The police did not register any case for any offence but took one Kailo Devi into custody and tortured and raped her. The injuries on the body of Kailo Devi are self evident to what extent the third degree methods have been adopted by the Police in connection with the investigation of the petty theft case. The incident would not have come into light but due to the timely visit of inspection by the Hon''ble Judge of this Court Hon''ble Mr. Justice Amarjit Chaudhary to Tohana for his annual inspection.

Two sets of petitions have been presented to His Lordship alleging that one Kailo Devi was taken into illegal custody by the SHO PS Jakhal and she had been raped and tortured during the period of illegal detention. His Lordship also directed the medical examination of the said Kailo Devi. His Lordship further observed that Kailo Devi was brought to the Court premises on a cot and His Lordship observed that she appeared to be in her trauma. The Medical Board which examined her earlier and also on the directions of Hon''ble Mr. Justice Amarjit Chaudhary found injuries on Kailo Devi. It is also on record that Kailo Devi was taken into custody and was detained from 5.2.1995 till 16.2.1995 i.e. for a period of 11 days. On the basis of the orders of Hon''ble Mr. Justice Amarjit Chaudhary dated 23.2.1995 the matter was registered in Crl. W.P. No. 187/95. This Court directed the enquiry by the Commissioner Hisar Division who conducted an enquiry and submitted his report on 15.5.1996. According to the Commissioner Kailo Devi was arrested and illegally detained from 5.2.1995 without any formal registration of the FIR against her and she has been kept in a wrongful confinement from 5.2.1995 to 16.2.1995 continuously and she was also tortured. Finally the Commissioner opined that the police officials named in his report and the house owner who had given the report of theft suspecting Kailo Devi as responsible for theft should be subjected to punishment as warranted by law. Thereafter the matter was adjourned from time to time. When the matter was placed before me on 12.8.1999 the learned AdvocateGeneral Haryana assured this Court that the then SHO Jakhal would be placed under suspension and the case will be registered against the concerned police officials who have allegedly tortured and raped the lady Kailo Devi. Thereafter by an order dated 18.8.1999 I opined that "prima facie the record shows that the then SP is also guilty of dereliction of his duties. It appears that he did not get the case registered when an under trial lady prisoner was tortured by the police." I further directed the Government to take such action as is required against the said SP departmentally and consider the desirability of placing him under suspension in view of the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed. After this order was passed on 18.8.1999 the then SP one Mr. Anil Dawra filed an application to be impleaded as a respondent in this petition as he is affected by the orders passed by this Court. He also filed a petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. for modification or recalling the order dated 18.8.1999.

Application for impleading the said Anil Dawra as a respondent is allowed.

The application for modifying or recalling the order dated 18.8.1999 is misconceived. Once the order is passed the Court will not alter the same. The inherent jurisdiction of this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked for altering or modifying the orders already passed. Further my order dated 18.8.1999 does not affect the applicant anyway. The only direction given by me is to the Government is to consider the desirability of placing the applicant under suspension in view of the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed. The very word "consider" denotes that the Government has to take a decision after examining the facts of the case and the record that are available with the Government or the record which has been placed either by the applicant or by any other source before the Government. My order does not obligate the government to place the concerned person under suspension without considering and examining the record. There cannot be any automatic suspension as it is not envisaged by my order dated 18.8.1999. Therefore no further orders are required to be passed on the application filed by the then SP.

The learned AG now states that in pursuance of the assurance given to this Court by him on 12.8.1999 the case has been registered against the erring officials and also the then SHO and lady constable Satya who assisted him in the incident. A case also has been registered in FIR No. 83 dated 13.8.1999 of PS Jhakal Tehsil Tohana. I direct the Government to appoint the Special Investigating Officer not below the rank of SP and see that the investigation is completed within 3 months from today and take such action as is required under law depending on the result of the investigation.

Any observation made by me in this order is only restricted to the disposal of this petition. It does not come in the way of proper investigation which has to be carried on without being influenced by any observations made herein.