The Supreme Court recently expressed dismay at a Haryana Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) for filing a charge under Section 180 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against an accused who refused to sign a confession statement.
The Court found the DSP’s conduct irresponsible and labeled his reply affidavit as audacious.
The Bench, comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta, reprimanded the official for the inappropriate filing and emphasized the need for more caution and responsibility in the future. The Court clarified that under Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), no statement made by an individual to a police officer during an investigation needs to be signed.
Although Section 180 of the IPC pertains to the refusal to sign a statement, the Court ruled that it did not apply in this particular case. However, no further action was taken against the official.
To prevent similar incidents and ensure awareness of legal provisions among police officers at all levels, the Court directed a copy of the judgment to be sent to the State’s Director General of Police (DGP).
The case before the Court involved a challenge to an order from the Punjab & Haryana High Court, which had denied the appellant’s request to quash proceedings in a cheating case. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, but granted the appellant the liberty to pursue remedies against charges under Section 180 of the IPC if they were framed or taken cognizance of later.
Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, along with Advocates Yugandhara Pawar Jha and Kunal Verma, represented the petitioner, while the State government was represented by Additional Advocate General (AAG) Anil Kaushik.
