1. In this petition, seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus, on 12.07.2021 a warrant officer was directed to be appointed to visit Police Post Sector 16, Panchkula, as also Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula, (and any other places that the petitioner suspected that his son had been taken illegally), with the Commissioner of Police, Panchkula, also directed to file an affidavit annexing therewith the CCTV footage of Police Post Sector 16, Panchkula, and Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula, from 08.07.2021 till 12.07.2021 mid-night.
2. Thereafter, though hearing in the matter had been adjourned to 15.07.2021, upon a request made by learned State counsel on 13.07.2021, to the effect that he needed the order passed by this court on the previous date as it had not been uploaded on the website of the High Court (in view of the fact that orders passed in habeas corpus petitions are not uploaded immediately, as also noticed in the order dated 13.07.2021), the matter had been taken up on that date with the warrant officer who had been directed to be appointed on the date before, called to court, and with him having come and reported to this court that upon visiting Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula, he found the petitioners’ son, i.e. the detenue (Mohit) present there; and that he was informed by the Munshi that an FIR had been registered alleging therein the commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, in the context of which he had been arrested.
Subsequently on 15.07.2021, with the report of the warrant officer not having been put up to this court though an affidavit of the Commissioner of Police, Panchkula, dated 14.07.2021, was already on record, hearing in the matter was adjourned to 19.07.2021, but its turn still not having come up, it was adjourned to 22.07.2021, with its turn again having come up after 4:00 pm and with learned counsel for the petitioner not present. Therefore it had been ordered to be taken up as the first case of the day, today.
3. Today, a perusal of the report of the Warrant Officer, dated 13.07.2021, shows that it is to the effect that he visited Police Station Sector -14, Panchkula, on 12.07.2021 at 8:50 p.m., after which he was told by the Munshi as has been recorded above, but with him further elaborating in the written report that the son of the petitioner had been arrested on 12.07.2021 at 1:15 p.m. and lodged in the police lockup (place not given) at 5:39 p.m. on 12.07.2021, with information of his arrest given to his mother on her mobile phone number (given in the said report), with such information also having been given to a friend of the detenue (by the name of Balkishan), through a written notice.
The warrant officer has next reported in his report that no date of birth of the detenue was mentioned in any of the documents shown to him (by the police) but it had mentioned at serial number 5 of column no.1 at page no.5 of the FIR (bearing number 191 dated 09.07.2021 lodged at the same police station), that his year of birth has been mentioned as 1998.
The warrant officer next stated that Inspector Rajiv Kumar of the said police station also reached there alongwith the investigating officer, Sushil Kumar, with the Munshi having ‘typed the DDR’ as regards the purpose of the visit of the warrant officer, and handed over that document to him, along with a copy of the arrest report and a copy of the FIR.
At the outset, it has also been stated in the report of the warrant officer that when he demanded to look at the Roznamacha as regards the arrest of the petitioners’ son, he was told that the Roznamacha (General Diary/Daily Diary Report) was online.
A copy of the DDR dated 12.07.2021 as regards the warrant officer’s visit to the police station as also an additional General Diary Report vide “GD request no.10” shown to be dated 12.07.2021 at 17:39 hours (5:39 pm), have also been annexed as a copy of the aforementioned FIR.
4. In the affidavit of the Commissioner of Police, Panchkula, dated 14.07.2021 (Sh. Saurab Singh, IPS), it has been stated therein that on the statement of one Rinku, resident of Indira Colony, Sector 16, Panchkula, an FIR was registered on 09.07.2021, in which five persons had been named by him (including the petitioners’ son-Mohit), to the effect that on 08.07.2021 the father of the complainant had been attacked by them (who unfortunately died).
It is next stated therein that on 09.07.2021, three accused by the name of Satish Kumar, Vicky and Sunny were arrested on 09.07.2021, who got recorded their disclosure statements, pursuant to which the ‘weapons used in the crime’ were recovered; and upon producing those three accused before the learned Duty Magistrate, they were remanded to judicial custody on 10.07.2021.
It has next been stated that the petitioners’ son, Mohit, was arrested on 12.07.2021 at 01:15 p.m. and on his disclosure statement his co-accused Mahipal was also arrested on the same day, with the investigation having been conducted by one Sub-Inspector Sushil Kumar, Incharge of the Police Post Sector 16, Panchkula, under the supervision of the Station House Officer, Police Station Sector-14, Panchkula.
As per the Commissioner, all legal procedures were adopted and that the son of the petitioner was named as an accused in the FIR, with a specific role attributed to him, with him having disclosed his age to be 18 years at the time of his arrest but thereafter, upon his parents being asked to produce proof as regards his age, photocopies of such documents were produced on 13.07.2021, in one of which his date of birth was recorded to be 23.06.2004 (thereby obviously making him just about 17 years of age); and on his Aadhar Card, his date of birth had been recorded as 26.06.2004.
The Commissioner has thereafter reiterated that the petitioners’ son took active part in the commission of the offence, with him having an iron rod in his hand and with him having attempted to hit the complainant on his head with the iron rod, but that he saved himself by raising his arms and suffered an injury on the finger of his left hand; with that iron rod also stated to have been recovered on 12.07.2021 (on the disclosure statement of the petitioners’ son, as contended in the affidavit).
It has next been completely denied by the Commissioner that the petitioners’ son was picked up on 08.07.2021.
5. As regards the CCTV footage of Police Post Sector 16, Panchkula, it has been stated by the Commissioner that no camara is installed in the said police post and therefore no footage was available, but as regards the footage of Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula, it has been preserved from 08.07.2021 till 12.07.2021.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner however submits that the petitioners’ son was actually picked up from his home at Indira Colony, Sector 16, Panchkula, on the night of 08.07.2021 at around 11:00 pm, and that CCTV camaras installed at the Labour Chowk, Sector 16, Panchkula, as also on the traffic light point between the petitioners’ home and Sector 16, Panchkula, can be seen to determine as to when he was actually picked up
He next submits that if he had been actually picked up from Industrial Area, Panchkula, the CCTV camaras installed at the Parshuram Chowk between Sector 14 and Industrial Area, Panchkula, can be seen to determine as to whether the petitioners’ son was illegally arrested or not.
7. Having considered the matter, firstly of course this court is to express its surprise with regard to the Police Post Sector 16, Panchkula, not being equipped with CCTV camaras, despite an affidavit having been filed by the Addl. Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary (Home)/DGP, Haryana, in another petition about 2 to 3 years ago, to the effect that all police stations/CIA staff in the State of Haryana had been equipped with the CCTV camaras, at all entry and exit points.
Obviously this court not having issued a specific direction that even police posts be so equipped, was taken unnecessary advantage of by the officers of the State to not install such camaras at police posts, which are equally important as regards determining as to whether somebody had been illegally detained in a police post or not, with that issue ‘hitting’ at the very root of a persons’ right to liberty as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
8. Consequently, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of Haryana, is directed to file an affidavit as to by when all entry and exit points of all police posts in the State of Haryana, will also be covered by CCTV footage, with it to be observed by this court that it would not expect a long time frame, keeping in view the fact that, to repeat, illegal detention of any person hits at a citizens’ basic fundamental right.
For that purpose, the hearing of the petition stands adjourned to 01.09.2021, along with CRWP no.5521 of 2021 (pertaining to the State of Punjab on the same issue).
9. As regards what has been contended by the learned counsel on the petitioner having evidence that he was illegally picked up (as alleged) and that he also has a mobile phone recording of the occurrence in question, showing that he was not a part of it and was in fact recording that from the top of his house, this court would refrain from saying anything with regard to that, as that possibly would be evidence that he might lead in his defence before the learned trial court/Juvenile Justice Board (if arraigned as an accused and charged with the commission of any offence).
As regards the time lapse between the arrest of the petitioners’ son at 1:15 pm at the Industrial Area, Panchkula, and his alleged detention in the Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula at 5:39 pm (after a gap of 4 hours and 24 minutes), that again would be something to be looked at by the court concerned/Juvenile Justice Board, in the context of whatever defence the petitioners’ son would take.
Consequently, as regards any such evidence, either for the purpose of bail or for the purpose of defence at the time of trial itself (if at all he is shown to be an accused in the report eventually submitted), this court would leave him to his remedy before the competent court/Juvenile Justice Board.
10. Hence, as regards this petition seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus, the detention of the petitioners’ son, prima facie at this stage only and specifically, having been shown to be recorded at Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula, in the context of a serious offence alleged to have been committed, nothing further is being stated by this court, except to further direct the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Haryana, to ensure that instructions are issued that upon any warrant officer being appointed by this court to visit a Police Station/Police Post/CIA premises etc., i.e. all premises as regards the Haryana Police, a DDR entry, whether written in a register or allegedly entered online, shall be immediately handed over to the warrant officer visiting, by taking a print out immediately thereafter, failing which, naturally, adverse inference can be taken by the court, that actually no such DDR entry at the relevant time was actually made.
