Supreme Court Refuses Stay on Judicial Probe Into Punjab Farmer’s Death

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the judicial probe ordered by the Punjab and Haryana High Court into the death of a 22-year-old youth during the agitation of farmers at Punjab- Haryana border, writes ETV Bharat's Sumit Saxena.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday declined to stay the judicial inquiry ordered by the Punjab and Haryana High Court into the death of a farmer, Shubhkaran Singh, during clashes between Haryana police personnel and the protesting farmers. The apex court stressed that the judiciary will take care of morale of the force, as well as morale of the people, and the right to fair investigation is also something that needs to be protected.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan said those who had moved the high court seeking judicial probe have "some genuine apprehensions". The bench was hearing a plea by Haryana government against the Punjab and Haryana High Court order to set up a panel to probe the death of Singh, during clashes between state police personnel and the protesting farmers.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Haryana government, vehemently argued before the bench that the order passed by the high court will impact the morale of the police force. The bench said there was a homicidal death due to a rubber bullet as per the FIR and the incident took place on Haryana side but no FIR was registered in the matter, on the other hand after a gap of a week Punjab police registered an FIR.

“If the Punjab police is allowed to investigate the FIR, your apprehension is that they can write anything in the report…the litigant or party before the court feel that there may not be a fair investigation”, the bench told Mehta. “Allegations are against Haryana Police…..”, said Justice Kant, adding that let the matter come up before high court on April 10.

Mehta said farmers were carrying lethal weapons and if police were to face PIL in each incident then how would they maintain law and order and insisted that the incident occurred on the Haryana side.

Justice Kant said people who moved before the high court had some genuine apprehension. “I am posing a question to myself, hundreds of people were gathering with lethal weapons and now a committee will say whether the action was proportionate or not….no police officer will be able to discharge his duty, whether it is Punjab police, Haryana police, or any other police. If this is the threat hanging”, Mehta argued.

Mehta pressed that protestors were carrying sharp-edged weapons and 67 policemen were injured during the clashes, and if a committee is appointed for one incident, then what would happen to the morale of the police responsible to maintain law and order situation. He added that the apex court could appoint a person of its choice to monitor the matter.

However, the apex court turned down Haryana government’s contention that the order for judicial inquiry will impact the morale of the police force. Mehta drew the court's attention to the seriousness of the situation, during the farmers protest, and added that "no one can function like this in front of swords, weapons….".

Justice Kant said the high court is expected to appoint one neutral empire against the backdrop that Haryana and Punjab police forces are taking different stands. Mehta said a Punjab officer is part of the committee who did not register an FIR for seven days in a homicidal death and he will decide now what report has to be filed. Justice Kant said he is a responsible officer and he is in the rank of additional director general of police (ADGP).

Justice Kant said, “the judiciary will take care of morale of the force, as well as morale of the people also… must have trust and faith in the investigation also. That right to fair investigation is also something needs to be protected….right now you have apprehension in your mind”. Mehta insisted that it will demoralize the force.

The bench observed that the former judge will only monitor and infuse confidence and further queried Mehta, are you experiencing difficulty in complying with the committee?

Mehta submitted that ADGP Haryana Amitabh Singh Dhillon can head the probe panel instead. "We cannot be a panacea for all conflicts. States also have constitutional courts," said the bench. Justice Kant said that even in the Lakhimpur Kheri case, a former judge was heading the probe. Mehta urged the bench to not compare the two cases. The apex court suggested waiting for the report of the committee and scheduled the matter for further hearing on April 19.

On March 7, the high court had formed a panel headed by a former high court judge to inquire into farmer’s death. Shubhkaran, 21, was a native of Bathinda. 12 police personnel were injured in clashes at Khanauri on the Punjab-Haryana border on February 21.

The high court had formed the committee headed by retired high court judge Jaishree Thakur to inquire into the various aspects of the case. The high court had said that the investigation regarding the death of Shubhkaran, cannot be entrusted solely either to Punjab or to Haryana for “reasons obvious as both states have several things to cover up”.

According to the order, the committee will be assisted by Additional Director General of Police (Punjab) Promod Ban and ADGP (Haryana) Amitabh Singh Dhillon.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice G S Sandhawalia and Justice Lapita Banerji, had said that “it was a sad state of affairs” that youngsters were “armed with lathis and at certain places with swords and spears and sharp-edged weapons” and children were “being exposed to violence”.

The clashes occurred when some protesting farmers attempted to head towards barricades and they were stopped by police personnel from crossing the state border and marching to Delhi. The farmers protesting at the borders of Punjab and Haryana, have faced stiff resistance from the Haryana Police, which used force to prevent them from marching towards the national capital.