Azadi-ka-Amrit Mahotsav aims at citizens' welfare, but police still comfortable with colonial structure: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that the police administration still continues to be comfortable "with colonial structure" despite the government marking India's 75th Independence Day celebrations as Azadi-ka-Amrit Mahotsav with a vision for citizens' welfare [Chantara v. State]..Justice Manju Ravi Chauhan made the observation while criticising the cavalier manner in which the police had prepared a counter affidavit in response to an anticipatory bail plea.."Since 75th Independence Day Celebrations, government has marked Azadi-ka-Amrit Mahotsav terming it to be 'Amrit Kaal' with prospective vision in welfare of citizens of the country, however, Police Administration feels more comfortable to remain with colonial structure. Such attitude of functionaries who are instrumental to safeguard the public at large diminishes the ingrained belief over the System and plays a role in impeding the goal set out to ascend to new heights of prosperity," the Court's order stated..Justice Chauhan found that the counter affidavit's contents reflected the impetuousness of the government counsel as well as the deponent. Each claim in the bail application was simply negated without due care and as per their whims and without any supporting material, the Court noted..It further said that it was a staggering irony that the Deputy Superintendent of Police, who was the deponent of the counter affidavit, believed that he could make such submissions without any cogent material supporting the claims in the affidavit..The Court went on to note that it had already warned government counsel repeatedly to be careful while dictating counter-affidavits, seemingly to no avail."Taking note of such negligent pleadings in counter affidavits, in numerous cases, this Court has already warned the learned Government Advocate as well as learned AGAs repeatedly to be careful while dictating counter affidavits but seems to be with no result," the order stated..The Court was hearing an anticipatory bail application filed by one Chantara who was booked for offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act and related offences under the Indian Penal Code. Earlier in 2020, she had been granted interim protection by the Court. At the time, the State was also directed to file a counter-affidavit.The Court found that the counter-affidavit so filed was drafted in a cavalier manner and was bereft of any cogent or coherent factual and legal foundation..The Court observed that on a bare reading of the counter-affidavit, the claim of the police that the bail applicant had "criminal intent" appeared to be based on skewed information. "No such officer is allowed to enjoy impunity on the pretext of discharging official functioning nor can be set free to form an audacious remark without any basis," the Court added.The Court added it was the prime duty of the government counsel, who drafts the counter affidavit, to acquire material that supports the statements being made in the counter affidavit..The Court further noted that the government counsel, IPS Rajpoot, AGA-I, who drafted the affidavit did not hesitate in "proving" that the bail applicant had a "criminal mind" without adducing any substance to support the claim."Excerpt of the averments in of counter affidavit says "लेकिन प्रार्थिनी अभियुक्ता आपराधिक प्रवर्ति की महिला हे" ['the woman is of criminal background']. Though no document is annexed. Remaining reply in entire counter affidavit rests on denial to each fact mentioned in anticipatory bail application," the Court observed. .It said that it could not turn a blind eye to such imprecise conduct and proceeded to direct that a personal affidavit be filed by the police officer concerned. This affidavit should detail the material based on which the police has made its claims in the counter-affidavit, the Court said. ."Let a personal affidavit be filed by the deponent of counter affidavit dated 22.9.2020 (Shailendra Singh Son of Sri Mahipal Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police/ Circle Officer, Sahawar, District Kasganj), within ten days, as to what was in his possession for making statement in paragraph no. 10 of the counter affidavit. He shall remain present before this Court on the said date along with the record of the case," the Court directed..The Court posted the matter for further hearing on February 21. The bail applicant was represented by advocate Ajay Kumar Vashistha..[Read Order].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.