The Supreme Courtroom on Friday stayed the Punjab and Haryana Excessive Courtroom instructions to register an FIR and to represent a SIT to probe the alleged kidnapping of a Chandigarh-based dentist, Mohit Dhawan, by Chandigarh Police officers.
On Friday, the matter got here up for listening to earlier than the two-judge bench of Justices A S Bopanna and Hima Kohli which sought a response from Dhawan on whose plea the HC had handed the order.
Directing a keep, the apex courtroom bench stated the case must be thought-about at size.
“The matter shall not be precipitated pursuant to the instructions of the Excessive Courtroom by way of the impugned order,” stated the SC Bench within the order.
The SC bench additionally requested the Chandigarh Police to protect the information, together with CCTV footage and name particulars, in reference to the case.
The courtroom posted the matter for additional listening to after 5 weeks.
Through the listening to, Extra Solicitor Common Okay M Nataraj requested “how can the excessive courtroom whereas listening to an anticipatory bail utility, order registration of FIR towards police officers and probe by a Particular Investigation Workforce”. He contended that the HC order “is completely with none jurisdiction”.
Showing for Dhawan, advocate Prashant Bhushan stated it is without doubt one of the worst instances of police excesses he has seen.
He submitted that Dhawan had filed a swimsuit for the restoration of some excellent dues owed to him by a girl from Nairobi who had approached him for her remedy. Attributable to this, the dentist was implicated in a collection of complaints about allegedly improper remedy offered to the lady, he stated.
Bhushan additionally informed the Bench that the excessive courtroom order reveals the police filed contradictory affidavits.
On March 3, listening to a petition by Dhawan alleging his abduction by personnel of Chandigarh Police, the HC had ordered registration of an FIR within the matter and directed a SIT probe to be carried out by the Punjab Police.
In its order, the HC had stated that “contemplating the truth that this case not solely has the potential to shake the arrogance of the widespread man within the administration of justice; but when incidents as alleged by the petitioner are discovered to be true, the conduct of police officers would quantity to subverting the course of justice by inflicting interference within the implementation of the orders handed by the Courts…distinctive circumstances of this case warrant investigation to be carried out by constituting a SIT headed by an officer not beneath the rank of SSP outdoors UT Chandigarh, after registration of an FIR on the idea of illustration submitted by the petitioner on February 3, 2022, together with the conduct of arresting group whether or not it was appearing in concatenation with abducting group”.
The HC requested the DGP, Punjab, to represent a SIT, headed by an officer not beneath the rank of SSP, assisted by some technical consultants in telecom area, to analyze the matter and submit its ultimate report back to the courtroom involved.