Delhi court deprecates practice of frequently summoning police officers
The court said if such a practice is adopted and followed by all the courts then it will be 'very difficult for the police officers to maintain law and order in their respective areas
Published: 22nd August 2023 10:35 AM | Last Updated: 22nd August 2023 10:35 AM | A+A A-
Image used for representational purposes only.
NEW DELHI: A sessions court here has deprecated the practice of frequently summoning police officers, other than the designated investigating officer, for addressing court queries.
Principal District and Sessions Judge Madhu Jain was hearing a plea of Ishwar Singh, the Station House Officer (SHO) of Badarpur police station, who had filed a revision petition against the order of a magisterial court dated May 18, 2023.
The magistrate had issued a notice to the Delhi Police Commissioner Sanjay Arora seeking an explanation as to why some prosecution witnesses and Singh were not complying with certain directions of the court.
“Perusal of record shows that the revisionist (Singh) has given a tabulated chart which shows that he has been summoned not once or twice but more than 300 times in the court and his plea is that in every case emanating from his police station instead of designated investigating officer it is the revisionist who is called for addressing the court queries on each and every case,” the judge said in an order passed on August 18.
The court said if such a practice is adopted and followed by all the courts then it will be 'very difficult' for the police officers to maintain law and order in their respective areas 'as they will be spending the whole of their time in the courts'.
"Not only this practice is to be deprecated but we must also stop this practice,” the court added.
It then set aside the magistrate’s order seeking an explanation from the police commissioner and also expunged some extra-judicial remarks made by the magistrate regarding Singh.
During the proceedings, counsel for Singh, Advocate Vaibhav Suri, said the revisionist did not receive any
adverse remarks in his career spanning two decades and merely because one subordinate officer chose not to appear on the summons of the court, there was no ground to pass adverse remarks and seek an explanation from the police commissioner.
