‘Lapses in filing police complaints’: HC urges Pb DGP to act

Chandigarh: Finding procedural lapses in filing ‘Kalandra' (police complaint) in the state of Punjab, the Punjab and Haryana high court has directed the DGP Punjab to institutionalise a comprehensive sensitisation programme for all police officials within Punjab to ensure strict adherence to the mandatory provisions of Section 195 CrPC, now Section 215 BNSS. "This Court is cognisant of the alarming proliferation of frivolous and vexatious complaints where baseless allegations are routinely weaponised to unsettle the administration of justice. To prevent the machinery of law from being transmuted into an instrument of harassment, the legislature enacted specific safeguards… Regrettably, it was observed that these procedural mandates are frequently bypassed or treated with a sense of casual indifference," observed the HC while asking the DGP for compliance with its directions within 6 months. The HC passed these orders while quashing criminal proceedings initiated against a Ludhiana resident accused of making false allegations against a public servant, holding that the case was filed in violation of mandatory legal procedure. The court ruled that the proceedings suffered from a jurisdictional defect, as the complaint was filed by a Station House Officer (SHO) instead of the competent authority.Justice Sumeet Goel passed this order while allowing a petition filed by Vinod Kumar alias Akhtar, who challenged a kalandra (police complaint) registered under Section 66 of the Punjab Police Act, 2007. The proceedings were pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMIC) in Ludhiana. The petitioner, Vinod Kumar, a social worker, earlier submitted representations to authorities alleging misuse of an Other Backward Class (OBC) certificate by an individual who secured govt employment. The petitioner described himself as a social worker and sought an official inquiry into the matter.
The concerned welfare authorities examined the complaint but concluded that there were no grounds to cancel the certificate. Kumar later pursued the matter further by submitting additional representations to senior police officials. Following these complaints, an inquiry was conducted at the office of the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana. The inquiry report reportedly concluded that the allegations were unsubstantiated and that the complaint cast aspersions on a judicial officer. On the basis of this report, police initiated proceedings against Kumar and filed a kalandra before the magistrate.After hearing the matter, Justice Goel observed that since the complaint was originally made to senior authorities and the inquiry was conducted at that level, any action arising from it should also be initiated by the same authority or a superior one. The court also observed that the magistrate issued notice in a routine manner without examining the statutory bar under Section 195 CrPC.MSID: 129090787 413 |