Court mandates a 60-day inquiry into claims of police misconduct infringing Article 21 rights
In a significant judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the Superintendent of Police, Raisen, to conduct a preliminary inquiry into allegations of public humiliation by police personnel at Police Station Bareli. The case, filed by petitioner Sangram Singh Rajoot, claims that police officials subjected him and other accused to a public parade without legal necessity, thus infringing their fundamental right to dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The petitioner alleged that after an inadvertent incident involving his vehicle, an FIR was lodged against him under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Sections 294, 323, 452, 427, and 506B. Following the FIR, Rajoot claimed that police officers demanded illegal gratification and threatened to implicate his family in criminal cases if the demand was not met. He further contended that on November 17, 2018, he and co-accused were paraded on foot from the police station to the court, a distance of approximately 2.5 kilometers, in full view of the public and media. This act, according to Rajoot, was intended to humiliate and degrade him.
The counsel for the petitioner argued that such actions violate the right to life and personal liberty, amounting to pre-trial punishment contrary to criminal jurisprudence principles, including the presumption of innocence. The State's counsel disputed these allegations, suggesting the necessity of factual verification and denying misconduct, while claiming the parade was due to the unavailability of an official vehicle.
Justice Himanshu Joshi, presiding over the case, acknowledged the serious implications of the allegations on the fundamental right to dignity. While recognizing that transportation on foot does not automatically violate fundamental rights unless done with malice, the court emphasized the importance of the presumption of innocence and condemned any pre-trial punishment.
Consequently, the court refrained from making conclusive observations about the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and directed the Superintendent of Police, Raisen, to examine the grievance and representations submitted by Rajoot. The inquiry, to be conducted by an officer not below the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police, is to be completed within 60 days. If the allegations are substantiated, appropriate departmental and legal actions are to be taken against the erring officials.
This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in upholding constitutional safeguards and human rights, particularly in preventing arbitrary and humiliating actions by state authorities.
Bottom line:-
Public parading of an accused without legal necessity or justification may infringe the fundamental right to dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. However, transportation on foot under unavoidable circumstances does not automatically constitute a violation unless deliberate humiliation or malice is established.
Statutory provision(s): Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Indian Penal Code Sections 294, 323, 452, 427, 506B.
