Delhi High Court has directed the registration of FIR against Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) under the SC/ST Act for allegedly neglecting his duties by failing to appear before the court despite notices and conducting an unfair inquiry in a criminal case.
Additional Sessions Judge directed the Joint Commissioner of Police, Western Range, to register an FIR against ACP Bijender Singh, who was also the Investigating Officer in the case.
The judicial officer asked the JCP to submit the compliance report on April 13.
The court said the FIR has to be lodged under Section 4 of the Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act which prescribes punishment for wilful neglect of duties by a public servant.
Dispute relates to a parking in a residential area that took place in July last year. The complainant lodged a criminal case alleging that the accused officer did not conduct a fair investigation in the matter and in fact, had sent various persons, including two Delhi Police constables, to the ancestral village of the complainant, an advocate, to pressurize him to withdraw the complaint.
The court further observed that ACP has been alleged to delegate his responsibilities which is a clear violation of Rule 7 of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Act which mandates that such cases have to be investigated by a police officer, not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.
“Investigating Officer should have conducted an impartial inquiry into the matter and should have taken the statement of the complainant and witnesses cited by him and the arrival of the decision on the complaint should have been on the basis of statements of both sides,” the court said.
It also observed that the ACP has been accused of conducting a one-sided inquiry and has failed to arrest the accused persons. “By failing to enquire the case impartially, the officer has violated the provisions of the Act and therefore, is liable to be prosecuted for dereliction of duties as required by law,” the court said.
DCP Dwarka even delegated the responsibility of forwarding charge sheet to Additional DCP, Dwarka may be to evade his responsibility under the rules or to prevent himself from coming into the picture, to save accused persons from being arrested,” the court said.