HC on cops turning hostile in Devas ‘king’ acquittal: not serious or hiding something
Vikram Singh Puar, king of the erstwhile princely state of Dewas Vikram Singh Puar, king of the erstwhile princely state of Dewas
“The police is synonymous with faith and security in the minds of general public but the above stated conduct of (three) police officials is really alarming. Such conduct and behavior of police officials undoubtedly diminishes the image of police which may create fear and insecurity in the mind of society. There is a need to stop this.’’ Referring to the three police officials who turned hostile, this observation was made by third additional and district sessions judge Joginder Singh while acquitting Vikram Singh Puar, the erstwhile king of Dewas state, in a murder case on Wednesday.
Vikram and 12 of his accomplices were accused of murdering Pratap Lodhi following a dispute over a piece of land on March 18, 2015. For a major part of the trial, Vikram was absconding. He spent less an hour in jail, spent two months in hospital and was out on bail for nearly a year. His father Tukojirao Puar was a former BJP minister and mother Gayatri is currently BJP MLA from Dewas.
ALSO READ | Dewas ‘king’ acquitted of murder after delayed trial
Constables Rajesh Bharwal and Jitender Verma and Head Constable Madan Yadav, who were posted at Barotha Police chowki, were produced by the prosecution as eye witnesses to the incident and circumstances but all of them went back on their previous statements and said they don’t recognise Vikram.
Investigating Officer Savita Chaudhary, in-charge of the police station, was the only officer who stuck to her statement that Vikram wanted to register a case of encroachment against relatives of the victim before the alleged murder.
She said she had telephonic conversation with Vikram when she tried to convince him that it was a civil matter but he was adamant and wanted to go to the disputed piece of land. Minutes later, she said in her deposition, she learnt about the assault and reached the spot where she was told by villagers that the perpetrators were Vikram and his associates.
The defence had accused her of naming Vikram at the behest of Education Minister Deepak Joshi because of his intra-party rivalry with Tukojirao. While the investigating officer denied this, other police officials did not back her and claimed they did not make the statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC.
The prosecution had argued that constables Rajesh and Jitender were asked by head constable Madan to follow Vikram and his accomplices after Vikram gave a complaint about encroachment, and the two were eyewitnesses to the incident.
In his order, the judge said that except Savita, all other witnesses turned hostile and though she support the prosecution case she neither witnessed the incident nor identified Vikram.
Referring to contradictions in the statements between Chaudhary and three police officials, the judge noted, “There is a need of proper investigation by higher police authorities in this regard to know the factual position in this regard in order to establish the faith of public in police administration. The manner in which police official tendered their testimony before the court is really surprising and sufficiently suggests that either the police officials were not serious towards their duties being public servant and pillars of law and order, or they were hiding something for which were duty bound or under obligation to disclose but did not do so intentionally.’’
The order said the court expects competent police authorities to take proper action against police officials to “stop such type of embarrassing situations”. Police officials were not the only ones to go back on their previous statements, even the family members of victim Pratap Lodhi said during cross examination that they had no dispute with Vikram, it said.
While the 12 accomplices were acquitted in December 2016, Vikram was tried alone when the prosecution filed a supplementary challan after he was arrested in January 2017. After the verdict, government pleader Girish Mungi said he would study the judgment but there was no ground for appeal because all witnesses had turned hostile.
For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App