The Supreme Court Bench questioned how the UP Police could describe a motorcycle rider as “unknown” when the complainant allegedly caught him at the spot and handed him over to police.
BY PC Bureau
New Delhi, September 30: The Supreme Court on Wednesday delivered a scathing rebuke to the Uttar Pradesh Police over its handling of a criminal investigation, saying it might as well disband the UP Police and hand over all investigations in the State to the CBI.
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva made the extraordinary remarks while questioning why police officials had shown a motorcycle rider as “unknown” in an FIR despite the complainant allegedly having caught him at the spot and handed him over to the police.
“In everything you have an agenda. How will people trust you if this is how you proceed with matters?” the Bench said, according to reports of the hearing. It also remarked that “this nonsense has to stop at some point.”
The case concerns a complaint in which the petitioner, appearing in person, alleged serious irregularities in the police investigation. She told the Court that after an incident involving a motorcycle, she had caught the rider at the spot and handed him over to the police.
Despite this, the police allegedly registered the FIR against an “unknown” motorcycle rider, leaving the accused column blank.
The petitioner further alleged that the police subsequently named the rider in the chargesheet after the High Court sought a status report, but later gave him a clean chit. She also raised questions about the motorcycle, claiming it had no number plate when it was seized but was subsequently shown with a registration number during the investigation.
The Bench specifically questioned the UP Police’s counsel on why a person allegedly caught at the scene was not identified in the FIR.
“Why did you write unknown if the person was caught at the spot?” the judges asked, questioning how citizens could retain faith in the police if investigations were conducted in such a manner.
The Court also took exception to what it saw as a potentially unexplained alteration in the case record. The Bench suggested that leaving the accused unnamed initially and introducing a name later could create scope for manipulation.
READ: Indian Captain Battles Omani Co-Pilot at 34,000 Feet, Averts Terror Crash, Saves 189
“Toeing the line is one thing but bending over backwards. And this kind of cover-up job? Less said the better,” the Bench remarked.
In another pointed observation, the judges questioned whether an accused’s name could effectively be substituted later depending on how the circumstances developed.
The Court did not, however, order that all Uttar Pradesh investigations be transferred to the CBI. Its remarks about the CBI and disbanding the UP Police were oral observations made during the hearing.
The Bench also criticised the affidavit filed by the UP Police as “completely uninspiring” and directed the concerned officer to appear at the next hearing with a fuller explanation.
The Court specifically noted that paragraph six of the police affidavit identified the rider as Tushar and directed the authorities to explain why his name was absent from the FIR initially and was disclosed only later.
The episode puts the spotlight not merely on a disputed investigation but on a more fundamental issue raised by the Court itself: if the identity of a person allegedly apprehended at the scene can be left out of the FIR and supplied later, how can the integrity of the investigation be assured?
