The Supreme Court on April 1 declined to intervene with a Punjab and Haryana High Court order constituting a special committee chaired by a retired judge, Justice Jaishree Thakur, to investigate the death of a 22-year-old man during farmers’ agitation at the Punjab-Haryana border.
The farmers’ protests were met with stiff resistance from the Haryana Police at the borders. The protesters, who were marching to Delhi, were stopped at the borders in February. Violence ensued after the agitators and the police had clashed.
Appearing before a Bench of Justices Surya Kant and K.V. Viswanathan, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the Haryana government, said the constitution of the committee headed by a retired Punjab and Haryana High Court judge was “demoralising” for the State police.
Mr. Mehta said the Haryana police was capable of investigating the death of Shubhkaran Singh, a farmer, fairly.
“This will demoralise the Haryana Police. Why not trust the police force to investigate? Sixty-seven police officers were injured facing the protesters who were armed with lethal weapons… Giving the investigation now to a committee headed by a retired judge would affect the morale of the State police… Tomorrow, a police officer will hesitate to fire,” Mr. Mehta argued vehemently.
He said the protesters’ vehicles resembled tanks and they were armed with swords, spears and sharp-edged weapons. The law officer said unfortunately women and children were also used as cover by them.
Justice Kant said the death was undoubtedly a homicide.
The Bench pointed out that the Haryana police did not register an FIR even a week after the death which occurred within the State’s jurisdiction. A zero FIR was finally lodged by the Punjab police, which was later transferred to the Haryana police.
The Bench said the High Court would have formed the committee, which besides Justice Thakur comprised two Additional Director Generals of Police, perceiving that a wrong signal would be sent to have the Haryana Police investigate a death which happened during clashes with its own personnel.
“The former judge’s presence would infuse a sense of transparency, impartiality and strengthen the public trust in the system,” Justice Kant addressed Mr. Mehta.
Mr. Mehta said the Supreme Court could just have the police officers to probe the death and report directly to it.
“We do not want the Supreme Court to be a panacea for all problems. The High Court is a constitutional court,” Justice Kant said.
Justice Kant said there was no basis to the apprehensions voiced by Mr. Mehta.
“The judiciary will take care of the morale of the force and also the right of the public to a fair investigation,” Justice Kant assured.
