Truth that Matters. Stories that Impact

Truth that Matters. Stories that Impact

Politics

Rajasthan High Court Questions Police After Dalit Family Attack Probe Changes Hands Six Times

The Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court has stepped in to question police authorities after an investigation into an alleged land encroachment and assault on a Dalit family in Bharatpur district saw six changes of investigating officers across 26 months without reaching completion.

What Happened

The case originates from Kair village in the Bayana block of Rajasthan’s Bharatpur district, where an attack on a Dalit family took place in an alleged attempt to encroach upon their agricultural land. Following the assault, an initial first information report was registered on May 10, 2024. A counter-case filed against the victims by the alleged attackers was subsequently examined by police and determined to be frivolous.

Despite this, the substantive inquiry into the original assault failed to conclude. Over the course of 26 months, the case file moved through six different investigating officers, comprising a Circle Officer and five Additional Superintendents of Police, including one assigned to the civil rights cell. The petitioner, 24-year-old Jitendra Kumar, approached the High Court seeking an impartial and timely investigation along with the submission of a chargesheet, pointing out that repeatedly being summoned each time a new investigator took over amounted to continuous harassment.

During court proceedings, Justice Shubha Mehta noted that the failure to conclude the inquiry within the legally prescribed timeframe was concerning and lacked a satisfactory explanation. The court was informed by the current investigating officer, Dinesh Kumar Meena, that charges against the 12 accused had been substantiated and a final report would reach the trial court within two weeks.

Key Highlights

  • The petitioner moved the High Court citing a 26-month delay, despite the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act mandating investigation completion within 60 days.
  • A total of 12 individuals from the Gujjar community were booked under the Indian Penal Code and the SC/ST (PoA) Act for offenses including rioting, unlawful assembly, attempt to commit culpable homicide, grievous hurt, criminal trespass, and criminal intimidation.
  • The investigation was handled successively by six different officers without resolution, while supervisory oversight was completely missing.
  • Justice Shubha Mehta directed the Public Prosecutor to secure affidavits from all previous investigating officers explaining the procedural delays.
  • Affidavits were also sought from members of the statutory state-level supervisory committee established under Rule 7(3) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act.

Why This Matters

Under statutory provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, investigations are required to be concluded within 60 days to ensure prompt justice in atrocity cases. In this matter, the delay stretched to over two years alongside an absence of institutional review. The high court’s demand for explanations directly addresses the lack of operational oversight by the mandated supervisory panel, which includes the Home Secretary, the Director General of Police, the Social Justice and Empowerment Secretary, and the Director of Prosecution.

What to Watch Next

The High Court has directed the Public Prosecutor to submit explanatory affidavits from all six investigating officers and the supervisory committee members detailing the causes behind the protracted delay. Additionally, the current investigating officer is slated to file the investigation findings in the trial court within two weeks. The Rajasthan High Court will take up the matter for its next hearing on September 7.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the victim approach the Rajasthan High Court?

The petitioner, Jitendra Kumar, approached the court seeking a fair probe and the prompt filing of a chargesheet after the police investigation stretched past 26 months without conclusion and was transferred between six investigating officers.

What did the current investigating officer tell the court?

Investigating officer Dinesh Kumar Meena stated that the offenses against the accused had been established during the probe and that the final investigation findings would be submitted before the trial court within two weeks.

Who serves on the statutory supervisory committee under the SC/ST Act?

The committee constituted under Rule 7(3) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act includes the Home Secretary, the Director General of Police, the Secretary of Social Justice & Empowerment, and the Director of Prosecution.

Source: Based on reporting from The Hindu.