2017 Gurugram School Murder Case | P&H High Court Seeks CBI's Stand On Plea To Quash Summons Against Cop Booked For Evidence Tampering

In a development related to the 2017 Gurugram school murder case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has sought a response from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Haryana Government on a plea filed by a police officer accused of tampering with evidence against the trial court's summoning order. 

Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul issued notice to the Haryana Government and the CBI and adjourned to July 28 as the respondent counsels sought time to file a reply.

The petition was filed by a Police Officer under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing of the impugned order passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI Haryana at Panchkula in a CBI case wherein the Police Officers are accused of tampering with the evidence. A bus conductor was initially framed as an accused in the Gurugram School Murder Case in 2017, who was later found innocent, and it was revealed that four police officers were charged for framing him.

In the present plea, it was alleged that the Police Officer was summoned without there being a sanction as required under Section 197 Cr.P.C.

Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial Court has committed a grave error in taking cognisance of the matter without adhering to the mandatory requirement under Section 197 Cr.P.C.

It was submitted that on an earlier occasion, the Special Judicial Magistrate had rightly declined to take cognisance against the petitioner owing to the absence of sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C.

However, despite no sanction being subsequently obtained and merely on the basis of an application moved by the complainant, the Special Court proceeded to take cognisance against the petitioner. This, it was contended, amounts to a review of an earlier order, which is impermissible in law and renders the impugned order illegal and unsustainable, added the Senior Counsel.

The Senior counsel further highlighted that the impugned order suffers from a patent irregularity, inasmuch as the allegations made against the petitioner and Assistant Commissioner of Police, Haryana Police Service, relate to acts done in discharge of official duties. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the protection afforded under Section 197 Cr.P.C., and cognisance could not have been taken in the absence of prior sanction.

Mr. Bipan Ghai, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Vinod Ghai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate Mr. Akhil Godara, Advocate and Mr. R.S. Bagga, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana

Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocate appeared on behalf of the respondent-CBI.

Title: BIREM SINGH v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANOTHER

Click here to read/download the order