"Why Not Hand All Investigations To CBI?" Supreme Court Raps UP Police

The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed strong displeasure regarding the manner in which the UP Police conducted its investigation. A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva orally remarked that if the police continued to function in this manner, perhaps all investigations in Uttar Pradesh should simply be handed over to the CBI.

"You have an agenda in everything. If you proceed with cases in this manner, how can people trust you? It would be better to assign all UP Police investigations to the CBI," the court remarked.

"We could even disband the UP Police. This nonsense must stop at some point," it said.

The matter relates to an investigation where the police registered an FIR against an "unknown" person regarding a motorcyclist, even though the complainant stated that he had captured the accused on the spot and handed him over to the police.

The bench questioned why the FIR was registered against unknown persons. 

"If the individual was caught on the spot, why was he listed as "unknown"? If he was caught at the scene, why was the FIR filed against an unknown motorcyclist? How are people supposed to trust the police?" the bench questioned.

The petitioner alleged that the police conducted the investigation in a one-sided manner, right  from the very beginning. He claimed that the name of the motorcyclist caught at the scene was not recorded in the FIR, and the column for the accused was left blank.

Later, following the High Court's intervention and a demand for a status report, the police included the motorcyclist's name in the charge sheet, but subsequently gave him a clean chit.

The petitioner also pointed out that when the motorcycle was seized, it had no number plate, but a registration number was added to it later during the investigation.

In response, the Supreme Court raised serious questions about the police's modus operandi, stating that while "toeing the line is one thing, bending over backwards is quite another - and then there is this kind of cover-up. The less said, the better".

The bench also questioned why the name of the accused, who was caught at the scene, was not included in the FIR.

"Perhaps if the circumstances turned in your favour, you might change the name or insert the name of someone known to you... is that how things work there?" the bench asked.

The top court also described the counter-affidavit filed by the UP Police as "completely disappointing."

It then directed the concerned police officer to appear in person at the next hearing, adding that 
the officer must come prepared with a better affidavit and clarify why the motorcyclist's name was not recorded in the FIR.

The court observed that it must be clarified why his name was initially omitted from the FIR and subsequently added.