The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Moga to conduct an inquiry into the conduct of police officials who repeatedly failed to appear as prosecution witnesses in a trial court. The case involves allegations of firing at a police party. The Bench observed that such absence delays criminal trials and provides grounds for accused persons to seek bail due to prolonged incarceration.
Court Grants Bail to Accused
Justice Sanjay Vashisth granted regular bail to an accused who has been in custody since August 29, 2024, in a case registered at City-1 police station in Moga under the Arms Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The court expressed concern over the police officials' failure to attend court despite repeated opportunities.
The Bench noted: “The present case is yet another example reflecting the conduct of official witnesses (police officials), who despite repeated opportunities and notices, are not appearing before the trial Court, thereby causing delay in conclusion of trial and creating a situation where the accused finds ground to seek concession of bail on account of prolonged incarceration.”
13 Opportunities Ignored
During the hearing, the court was informed that none of the official prosecution witnesses stepped into the witness box despite 13 opportunities granted by the trial court. The State counsel argued that the petitioner was involved in two other criminal cases and, being a habitual offender, did not deserve bail. However, Justice Vashisth noted that the State counsel could not provide a satisfactory explanation for the non-appearance of the witnesses.
Justice Vashisth observed: “The conduct of the police officials concerned, who have repeatedly failed to appear before the trial Court, deserves to be examined by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga.”
Bail Granted Due to Trial Delay
Granting bail, the court stated that the petitioner's incarceration could not be prolonged indefinitely. He had been in jail since August 29, 2024, and the trial had not progressed for reasons not attributable to him. The Bench remarked: “Without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that further detention of the petitioner inside the jail would not serve any useful purpose.”
Inquiry Ordered
Justice Vashisth directed that a copy of the order be forwarded to the SSP, Moga, for holding an inquiry into the conduct of the concerned police officials. If any official is found at fault, appropriate action should be taken in accordance with the law. The SSP must apprise the court of the decision taken before the next hearing, which is scheduled for July 31.
