Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail, Slams Police Officer Over False Affidavit and Demands Explanation
_1235033069.jpg)
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has taken severe legal exception to a misleading affidavit submitted by a senior police official during a bail hearing, emphasizing that deliberate or careless misinformation impacting personal liberty cannot be overlooked. While granting bail to an accused individual by invoking the constitutional protections under Article 21, the bench directed a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) to submit a formal explanation and make a personal appearance before the court.
False Affidavit Misleads Court on Criminal Records
The judicial scrutiny arose during the second bail petition filed by an accused person facing criminal charges registered at the Bichhore police station in Nuh. During the proceedings, the petitioner's legal counsel pointed out a critical discrepancy in the state's previous opposition: while the petitioner had correctly stated that only a single case was pending against him, an earlier state reply filed by the police claimed that five criminal cases were pending.
The defense argued that this false information had critically influenced the court's prior decision to deny bail. Although state representatives conceded during the hearing that technical errors led to the erroneous inclusion of five cases in the earlier affidavit, they continued to contest the current bail plea. The defense countered that the accused had already endured over ten months of incarceration, no recoveries were pending, and the trial was unlikely to conclude anytime soon. Furthermore, defense counsel highlighted that no police personnel sustained injuries during the incident, whereas the petitioner himself had suffered a gunshot wound.
Article 21 and the Right to Speedy Trial
Evaluating the merits of the case and the prolonged detention, Justice Surya Pratap Singh underscored the fundamental guarantees embedded in the Constitution. The High Court firmly reiterated that the right to a speedy trial is an indispensable component of the due, fair, and just legal process guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Taking into account the totality of circumstances, including the duration of custody and the lack of progress in the trial, the bench allowed the second bail petition, granting immediate relief to the petitioner.
High Court Summons DSP Over False Submission
Beyond granting bail, the bench trained its focus on administrative accountability, noting that an officially sworn affidavit containing incorrect criminal details submitted by a law enforcement officer is a grave matter that warrants strict judicial notice.
Consequently, the High Court directed Jitendra Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP), Punhana, to file a detailed personal explanation clarifying the exact circumstances that led to the submission of incorrect details in the court record. Furthermore, the concerned police officer has been ordered to appear in person before the bench during the next scheduled hearing on September 11, reinforcing judicial intolerance toward procedural negligence and misleading police filings.
_1587178762_351x234.jpg)
_305727748_351x234.jpg)
_744867096_351x234.jpg)
_483913699_351x234.jpg)
