Court on its own Motion vs Bhagwan Singh Constable

A.S. Bains, J.

In Habeas Corpus Petition (Cr. W. No. 18 of 1981) filed by Jagdish Raj against S.I. Pritam Singh, one of the respondents, Warrant Officer was appointed to effect service on the respondent and also to effect search of the Police Station Majitha as the allegation in the Habeas Corpus Petition was that Smt. Tarsem Rani, Ashok Kumar and Hazari Lal were taken into illegal custody by the S.H.O. and were not produced before any Magistrate. They Warrant Officer in compliance with the orders of the Court went to the Police Station Mamjitha. He was not allowed to enter the Police Station for about one hour and fifteen minutes by Bhagwan Singh constable No. 2998 (now respondent No. 1) and it was only thereafter that he was allowed to enter the Police Station and then he found Smt. Tarsem Rani and Ashok Kumar detenus locked in the Police Station, but Hazari Lal detenu was let off by the Police in the evening on that day.

Notice to constable Bhagwan singh was issued under the Contempt of Court Act for 7th February, 1983, on which date, he did not appear and bailable warrants were issued for 21st February, 1983, to procure his presence. On that date he appeared in the court but the case was adjourned for 7th March, 1983 at the request of the counsel for the respondent. He filed his affidavit and, according to him, the keys were not with him but were with the Munshi and, therefore, he could not open the main gate for one hour and 15 minutes.

Notice of contempt was then also issued to Moharrir Constable Gurmej Singh (respondent No. 2) for 18th March, 1983, on which date he did not appear and bailable warrants were issued against him to procure his presence on 25th March, 1983. On that date, he appeared and filed his affidavit and, according to him, the keys of the main gate were with Moharrir Head Constable Narjit Singh and not with him.

Notice of contempt was then issued to Narjit Singh, Moharrir Head Constable and also to S.I. Pritam Singh, S.H.O. for 8th April, 1983, on which date they appeared in the Court and the case was adjourned to 12th April, 1983 at their request.

Affidavits have been filed by Narjit Singh, Moharrir Head Constable and S. I. Pritam Singh, but they have not explained as to with whom the key of the gate was on that date.

All the respondents are present and they have pleaded guilty and thrown themselves at the mercy of the Court. To our mind, this is a serious matter. If the respondents behave with the officer of the High Court in this manner, it would be unimaginable as to how they would be behaving with the ordinary citizens. The police men are the custodians of law and order. Their duty is to protect the innocents and to apprehend the culprits and they have to perform their duties conscientiously.

Rt. Hon. Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls, in his book "The Due Process of Law", 1980 Edition, Part Three, Chapter I ` Making an arrest." has described the role of Police as under :

"In safeguarding our freedoms, the police play a vital role. Society for its defence needs a wellled, welltrained and welldisciplined force of police whom it can trust and enough of them to be able to prevent crime before it happens, or if it does happen, to detect it and bring the accused to justice. The police, of course, must act properly. They must obey the rules of right conduct. They must not extort confession by threats or promises. They must not search a man''s house without authority. They must not use more force than the occasion warrants."

But in the present case, the respondents, in our view, deliberately did not open the gate for one hour and fifteen minutes although the Warrant Officer had disclosed his identity and secondly, they have not come with the truthful versions rather they have concealed about the possession of the key. In this situation, we hold them guilty of criminal contempt as defined under section 2 (c) (iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. We do not find any mitigating ground to take a lenient view. They are accordingly convicted under section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ each or in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each. It is directed that they will pay the fine within one month from today.

JUDGMENT accordingly.