LI Network
Published on: 24 December 2022 at 18:55 IST
Delhi High Court in Balkishan Sharma Versus State NCT of Delhi And another issued Notice to the Government.
The Write petition filled by Advocate PayalBahl challenging the constitutional validity of the “Point No. l2 – Particulars of Accused Person (Suspect) * Not Charge Sheeted / PIR Not Prepared” of the Police Report under the aegis of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973.
Plea stated that Point No. l2 of Chargesheet Prepared by Delhi Police violate the Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
It is submitted that the present Writ Petition is challenging the constitutional validity of the “Point No. 12 – Particulars of Accused Person (Suspect) – Not Chargesheeted / PIR Not Prepared” of the Police Report under the aegis of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as being violative of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The “Point No. 12 – Particulars of Accused Person (Suspect) – Not Chargesheeted / PIR Not Prepared” of the Police Report under the aegis of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is violative of the Fundamental Right as enshrined under the aegis of Article 21 of the Constitution of the Petitioner and as such any person against whom no evidence is found by the investigation agency such as Delhi Police.
Petitioner submitted to the Court, “The impugn Point No. 12 of the Police Report is prima facie against the scheme of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and let along in violation of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India,”.
Petitioner Added,”Hence, the present Writ Petition is challenging the constitutional validity of the “Point No. 12 – Particulars of Accused Person (Suspect) – Not Chargesheeted / PIR Not Prepared” of the Police Report under the aegis of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as being violative of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and against the provision as enshrined under the aegis of Section 169 read with Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,”.
Added,”It is submitted that there is not provision under the aegis of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to hold a person as a suspect without adducing a single Evidence against him/her. It is submitted that the Petitioner pleads before the Hon’ble Court that his fundamental Right of Life which includes Right to Life with Dignity as enshrined under the aegis of Article 21 of the Constitution of India is infringed by impugned act of the Delhi Police”.
“Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Indian Penal Code, 1860 and any other penal / criminal laws does not define the word “Suspect””, Petitioner added.
Also, as per the Petitioner, “Black’s Law Dictionary (11th Edition). It is submitted that neither “Suspect” nor “Suspicion” is based upon the truth or prima facie evidence. Suspect: 1. To consider (something) to be probable. 2. To consider (something) possible. 3. To consider (a person) as having probably committed wrongdoing,”
“but without certain truth. Suspicion: The apprehension or imagination of the existence of something wrong based only on inconclusive or slight evidence, or possibly even no evidence.”.
“It is submitted that the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has not made any rules / regulations under the provision of Article 225 and/or Article 226 and/or Article 227 and/or Section 477 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 that allows for placing the name of the person on “Point No. 12 – Particulars of Accused Person (Suspect)– Not Charge Sheeted / PIR Not Prepared” of the Police Report under the aegis of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.”.