PUNJAB HIGHLIGHTS POLICE SACRIFICES
Chandigarh July 1:
State pleas are seldom mounted on an emotional platform and especially so when the matter relates to the functioning of the police department.
But in a notable exception, the state of Punjab has mounted a rather sentimental challenge to a high court order whereby the CBI was directed to carry out a probe into "encounter killings" during the heyday of militancy.
The state has taken special umbrage to Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Ranjit Singh’s observation that "if one is to look around, one may not be able to find many officers in Punjab police who are free from taints and who could be entrusted with investigation and expected to be independent".
Raising the pitch and finding the observation not in keeping with the ground realities, the state, in its appeal filed against the order, has highlighted the fact that as many as 1,281 police officers fell prey to the demon of terrorism that shook the state not so long ago. The appeal also asserted that the judge’s observation, if accepted sans protest, would dampen the morale of the state police force that had played an exemplary role in quelling the terror and bringing back normalcy to the state.
The appeal stated that top police officers like Julio Reberio, DS Mangat, AS Atwal, AS Brar, Gobind Ram and judicial officers like HR Kaushik and NS Prashar were targeted, as were many others. It also said, there were unabated brutal killings of common people which led to the police launching many major operations in cooperation with the army and paramilitary forces.
Given the extraordinary situation that posed a grave threat to country’s integrity, the police never compromised on gallantry and lost quite a few of its brave sons, the appeal mentioned. The appeal raised a vital point as to whether the court could direct the CBI to conduct a probe without state’s consent. It was hammered in the appeal that the issue was still under consideration of the apex court following its judgment in the ‘State of West Bengal Vs Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (2006 SCC)’.
Moreover, the appeal highlighted that the judge’s remarks against Vigilance Bureau were uncalled for as the bureau had nothing to do with cases related to militancy and probed only corruption cases. Zeroing in on the issue of proclaimed offenders who were still to be traced, the state asserted that due procedure had always been followed to nab them.
The state also questioned the motive and conduct of Satwant Singh Manak, a former cop dismissed from service due to laxity, in moving the high court where he raised the plea of "10 encounter killings" by some Punjab cops during militancy era. The cops accused by Manak, including Bachan Singh Randhawa, who is currently posted as assistant commandant of 4 IRB in Kapurthala, have already challenged justice Ranjit Singh’s order.
Chandigarh July 1:
State pleas are seldom mounted on an emotional platform and especially so when the matter relates to the functioning of the police department.
But in a notable exception, the state of Punjab has mounted a rather sentimental challenge to a high court order whereby the CBI was directed to carry out a probe into "encounter killings" during the heyday of militancy.
The state has taken special umbrage to Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Ranjit Singh’s observation that "if one is to look around, one may not be able to find many officers in Punjab police who are free from taints and who could be entrusted with investigation and expected to be independent".
Raising the pitch and finding the observation not in keeping with the ground realities, the state, in its appeal filed against the order, has highlighted the fact that as many as 1,281 police officers fell prey to the demon of terrorism that shook the state not so long ago. The appeal also asserted that the judge’s observation, if accepted sans protest, would dampen the morale of the state police force that had played an exemplary role in quelling the terror and bringing back normalcy to the state.
The appeal stated that top police officers like Julio Reberio, DS Mangat, AS Atwal, AS Brar, Gobind Ram and judicial officers like HR Kaushik and NS Prashar were targeted, as were many others. It also said, there were unabated brutal killings of common people which led to the police launching many major operations in cooperation with the army and paramilitary forces.
Given the extraordinary situation that posed a grave threat to country’s integrity, the police never compromised on gallantry and lost quite a few of its brave sons, the appeal mentioned. The appeal raised a vital point as to whether the court could direct the CBI to conduct a probe without state’s consent. It was hammered in the appeal that the issue was still under consideration of the apex court following its judgment in the ‘State of West Bengal Vs Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (2006 SCC)’.
Moreover, the appeal highlighted that the judge’s remarks against Vigilance Bureau were uncalled for as the bureau had nothing to do with cases related to militancy and probed only corruption cases. Zeroing in on the issue of proclaimed offenders who were still to be traced, the state asserted that due procedure had always been followed to nab them.
The state also questioned the motive and conduct of Satwant Singh Manak, a former cop dismissed from service due to laxity, in moving the high court where he raised the plea of "10 encounter killings" by some Punjab cops during militancy era. The cops accused by Manak, including Bachan Singh Randhawa, who is currently posted as assistant commandant of 4 IRB in Kapurthala, have already challenged justice Ranjit Singh’s order.