LI Network
Published on: January 11, 2024 at 10:00 IST
In a recent development, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has refused to reconsider its decision to remove IPS officer Sanjay Kundu from the position of Director General of Police, emphasizing the importance of an unbiased investigation over safeguarding the reputation of officers.
The order aimed to prevent interference with a probe into a businessman’s complaint, alleging a threat to his life by a former IPS officer and a practicing lawyer.
As a response to the removal, the state appointed Kundu as the Principal Secretary of the Ayush Department, with his retirement scheduled in three months.
The case centers around a business dispute between the complainant, Nishant Sharma, and a Senior Advocate, described as an “old acquaintance” of Kundu.
While Kundu asserts that he engaged in a cordial telephonic conversation with Sharma as part of police-led mediation principles, Sharma alleges that Kundu issued threats.
Kundu had initially approached the Supreme Court against the removal order, but the Supreme Court directed him to seek relief from the High Court.
A division bench, led by Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, expressed difficulty in determining the truth between conflicting versions.
The Court, however, emphasized that Kundu’s involvement in mediating a civil dispute went beyond the scope of his duties as a senior police officer. It also noted a specific instance of Kundu intimidating the officer investigating the case, making it unsafe for him to continue in his post.
The Court questioned whether it should overlook its constitutional responsibility for ensuring a fair investigation under the pretext of protecting the officers’ reputations. It emphasized that a fair trial depends on a fair investigation and declined to recall its removal order.
The Court also dismissed a plea filed by Shalini Agnihotri, the transferred Superintendent of Police for Kangra, highlighting that sufficient evidence, in the form of CCTV data analysis, was available but not utilized in the investigation.
The Court criticized Agnihotri’s defense, stating that celebrating festivals should not take precedence over addressing a serious threat to a citizen’s life.
While rejecting the plea to transfer the probe to the CBI, the court directed the State government to consider forming a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to coordinate the investigation and ensure the safety of Sharma and his family.
The court requested a fresh status report, scheduling the matter for reevaluation on February 28 under the case title “COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION Versus STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.”