State of Karnataka Vs. Krishna @ Challakili and Another - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- constitution of india -- article 226 & 227: [h.n. nagamohan das, j] writ petition filed by the trade union and an employee questioning the competency of the direction issued by the member of the national commission for sc & st to reinstate the fourth respondent, a senior manager locus standi of the petitioners held, first petitioner is espousing the cause of its members who are the employees of third respondent/company -second petitioner is an employee of the third respondent/company and member of first petitioner trade union. the petitioners are questioning the competency of second respondent to issue the impugned directions and not the service conditions. though the impugned direction mentions reinstatement and payment of other benefits to the fourth respondent the same is only an incidental. the first petitioner being the trade union representing the majority of employees of the third respondent company and the second petitioner being an employee are entitled to maintain a writ petition questioning the competency of second respondent to issue the impugned direction. article 338 ; [h.n. nagamohan das,j] constitution of national commission for schedule castes and schedule tribes - power of the commission to set aside a concluded enquiry and an order of penalty held, the second respondent being the member of the first respondent commission is not empowered to set aside a concluded inquiry and the order of penalty and the order of appellate authority under article 338 of the constitution of india. on facts, held, the second respondent directed the third respondent to conduct a fresh inquiry, to treat fourth respondent as deemed to have been continued in service and to pay him the salary and other allowances, by this impugned direction the second respondent virtually set asides the inquiry report, order of penalty and the order of appellate authority. therefore, the impugned direction issued by the second respondent is without power and authority. - 2. as far as the first aspect of the argument is concerned, even though there is evidence with regard to the recovery, we find it impossible to hold that this material would be good enough to sustain a conviction because there is one aspect of the case which the prosecution must establish before the accused can be convicted namely the aspect of identification. consequently, even though the acquittal from the court would result in a virtual failure of justice, we can only lay the blame at the hands of the prosecuting agency, namely the police. what is not realised is the fact that the acquittal is because of the complete failure of the prosecution which is attributable to two factors, the first is that the investigation itself is extremely casual and in the majority of cases totally negligent and secondly, because of the fact that as far as the follow up is concerned, there is an astounding level of negligence on the part of the investigating agency as far as the production of the evidence and of the witnesses. the aspect of laxity and negligence will have to be totally avoided and specific instructions will have to be issued to the departments that the court will be left with no option except to hold the individuals responsible if a prosecution fails because of the weak and inefficient investigation. more importantly, this aspect will include the most important ingredient of a competent investigation as this court has come across numerous instances where the prosecution lias failed only because of delays and other forms of weaknesses that the accused have capitalised on. more importantly, it will have to be clearly brought to the notice of the police that they will have to be particularly vigilant with regard to the service of summons and warrants on the accused persons as case after case has been failing on the specious plea that the witnesses have not been produced.1. the learned additional state public prosecutor has advanced a very valid argument in this case wherein he points out that the offence was one under section 394, indian penal code in so far as the two accused are alleged to have snatched a mangalasutra worth rs. 2,500/- and cash worth rs. 250/- from smt. vasantha near the binny mills railway bridge at bangalore city. learned counsel submitted that in this case, the accused were apprehended and some property was recovered at their instance and he submitted that this recovery alone was sufficient to establish their guilt. furthermore, his contention is that unfortunately, the main evidence of smt. vasantha is not before the court because even though summons and a non-bailable warrant was issued, the prosecution apparently did not produce her. irrespective of the non-production of the complainant, the learned state public prosecutor submitted that these are serious anti-social offences and that not only should the courts be extremely particular about ensuring that such accused do not get away and are deterrent dealt with but furthermore, he also advanced the submission that if there are any lacunae on the part of the prosecuting agencies that appropriate and stringent directions must be issued in order to ensure that the rule of law prevails.2. as far as the first aspect of the argument is concerned, even though there is evidence with regard to the recovery, we find it impossible to hold that this material would be good enough to sustain a conviction because there is one aspect of the case which the prosecution must establish before the accused can be convicted namely the aspect of identification. in offences of the present type, dual identification is necessary because the complainant will have to identify the accused as the persons who committed the offence and secondly, the complainant would also have to identify the property as otherwise, the recovery of some cash or some gold chain would be inconclusive. in this case, event that has not happened because the only recovery is of a knife and that again has not been identified by anybody as being the weapon used in the commission of the offence. consequently, even though the acquittal from the court would result in a virtual failure of justice, we can only lay the blame at the hands of the prosecuting agency, namely the police.3. the learned additional state public prosecutor is right when he points out that when instances of this type take place, a wrong impression is created in the public mind that the courts are acquitting guilty persons and contributing to the break down of the law and order situation. what is not realised is the fact that the acquittal is because of the complete failure of the prosecution which is attributable to two factors, the first is that the investigation itself is extremely casual and in the majority of cases totally negligent and secondly, because of the fact that as far as the follow up is concerned, there is an astounding level of negligence on the part of the investigating agency as far as the production of the evidence and of the witnesses. it is a matter of plain common sense that if the evidence is kept back and if the material witnesses are not produced that the accused will have to be acquitted and therefore, we have little doubt about the fact that it is not only a case of negligence in instances of this type but that we cannot rule out the aspect of collusion. the time has therefore come for this court to make a serious attempt to put a stop to these malpractices in the public interest and in order to maintain the rule of law.4. the secretary to government, home department, is requested to direct the heads of the police department and in particular, the agencies in-charge of the training of the police at all levels to see to it that a degree of professionalism and responsibility is ensured in respect of the investigation of all criminal offences. the investigation must be time bound, it must be effective and it must be in keeping with what the law expects of the police department. the aspect of laxity and negligence will have to be totally avoided and specific instructions will have to be issued to the departments that the court will be left with no option except to hold the individuals responsible if a prosecution fails because of the weak and inefficient investigation. more importantly, this aspect will include the most important ingredient of a competent investigation as this court has come across numerous instances where the prosecution lias failed only because of delays and other forms of weaknesses that the accused have capitalised on.5. as far as the production of evidence is concerned, the investigating officers shall be specifically informed that it is their personal responsibility for which they will be held personally accountable if the requisite evidence such as property, documentary evidence etc., is not forthcoming before the court. more importantly, it will have to be clearly brought to the notice of the police that they will have to be particularly vigilant with regard to the service of summons and warrants on the accused persons as case after case has been failing on the specious plea that the witnesses have not been produced. all necessary steps must be taken to ensure the full particulars and whereabouts of the witnesses and whenever they are required to be produced before a court, summons or warrants will have to be executed on a time bound basis and without any false or dishonest excuses being made. it has almost become a joke for the courts to have to put up with thousands of false endorsements from the police who do not even lift their little finger for the service of summons and executing the warrants. the supervisory officers shall therefore ensure that stringent directions should be issued to put a stop to this malpractice.6. lastly, as far as the subordinate courts are concerned, the learned magistrates and judges shall ensure that some degree of stringent supervision accompanies the orders for the service of summons or execution of warrants and that if false excuses are given, that action is taken against at least a few of the errant officers or constables as the case may be, so that this malpractice is stopped. it would be desirable to ensure that the names of the constables or officers responsible for the production of the witnesses is recorded in cases where delays occur or in cases where it appears to the court that the police are acting in collusion with the accused.7. we have issued these directions in the hope that it will bring about some improvement in the present state of affairs. the registrar general shall accordingly forward a copy of this order to the home secretary, government of karnataka, with the request that he should kindly look into the matter and issue appropriate directions to bring about some improvement in the public interest.8. on merits, we are unable to hold that any useful purpose will be served by entertaining this appeal. the same is accordingly dismissed on merits.