Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail of Police Officer in Jharkhand FIR Tampering Case image for SC Judgment dated 06-03-2024 in the case of The State of Jharkhand vs Sandeep Kumar
| |

Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail of Police Officer in Jharkhand FIR Tampering Case

The Supreme Court of India recently set aside the anticipatory bail granted to a senior police officer, Sandeep Kumar, in a case involving serious allegations of FIR tampering and wrongful arrest. The case, The State of Jharkhand vs. Sandeep Kumar, revolved around whether an officer holding a position of power should be granted pre-arrest bail despite evidence suggesting manipulation of records to shield an accused individual.

The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court of Jharkhand had granted anticipatory bail without recording any substantive reasons, which was contrary to established legal principles. Given the serious nature of the allegations, which involved deliberate falsification of records and wrongful imprisonment of an innocent person, the Court ruled that granting bail to the accused officer would send the wrong message to society.

Background of the Case

The case stemmed from a complaint filed against a police officer, Sandeep Kumar, who was serving as the Officer-in-Charge at Dhanwar Police Station at the relevant time. The allegations against him arose in connection with Dhanwar PS Case No. 276 of 2021, where an individual named Ranjeet Kumar Saw was arrested under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Copyright Act, 1957.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-acquits-two-accused-in-moradabad-burn-case-upholds-life-sentence-for-one/

According to the prosecution, the accused police officer manipulated official records by altering the name of the father of the arrested person. This act resulted in the wrongful arrest of an innocent person, Ranjeet Kumar Saw, son of Balgovind Saw, instead of the actual accused, Ranjeet Kumar Saw, son of Lakhan Saw.

Initial Bail Denial and High Court’s Reversal

The respondent initially approached the Sessions Court seeking anticipatory bail, but the plea was rejected on April 5, 2022. The Sessions Court noted that:

  • CCTV footage from the police station showed that the real accused, Ranjeet Kumar Saw (son of Lakhan Saw), had multiple meetings with the police officer before being let go.
  • The wrongful arrest was carried out at night, raising suspicions of deliberate misconduct.
  • The interpolations in the FIR were clearly visible and raised serious questions about the officer’s role.

Despite these observations, the officer later moved the Jharkhand High Court and was granted anticipatory bail on July 6, 2022. However, the Supreme Court noted that the High Court failed to provide any reasoning for granting relief.

State’s Appeal Before the Supreme Court

Aggrieved by the High Court’s decision, the State of Jharkhand filed an appeal before the Supreme Court, arguing that the anticipatory bail order was issued without considering the gravity of the offense. The State contended that:

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-rejects-juvenility-claim-in-1982-murder-conviction/

  • The accused was a police officer who had abused his official position to manipulate an investigation.
  • The interpolations in the FIR were clearly visible, yet no one had taken responsibility for them.
  • The officer’s actions had directly resulted in the wrongful imprisonment of an innocent person.
  • Given his rank and authority, there was a high risk that he could tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.

Key Observations by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court underscored several important legal principles while overturning the High Court’s order:

  • Judicial discretion in bail matters: While granting bail is discretionary, such discretion must be exercised judiciously and supported by cogent reasons. The High Court failed to provide any justification for its order.
  • Role of police officers in the justice system: The Court noted that when a police officer, who is entrusted with upholding the law, manipulates records to obstruct justice, it is a serious offense requiring strict scrutiny.
  • Public interest and credibility of law enforcement: The Court held that allowing a police officer accused of such misconduct to go free on anticipatory bail would erode public trust in law enforcement agencies.
  • Comparison with general bail principles: Although the offenses involved did not carry a punishment exceeding seven years, the Supreme Court emphasized that different standards apply to police officers accused of manipulating the justice system.

Supreme Court’s Verdict

The Supreme Court allowed the State’s appeal and set aside the High Court’s anticipatory bail order. The Court ruled that:

“In the light of these serious allegations made against no less than a senior police officer, an essential cog in the machinery of law enforcement, the High Court ought not to have taken a liberal view in the matter for the mere asking.”

The Court further directed that if the respondent is arrested, his application for regular bail should be considered on its own merits, without being influenced by the Supreme Court’s observations.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s judgment reaffirms the principle that public servants, especially law enforcement officers, are held to higher standards of accountability. The ruling emphasizes that courts must carefully evaluate bail applications, particularly in cases involving abuse of power, to ensure that justice is served and public trust in the legal system remains intact.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/custody-battle-over-minor-child-supreme-court-upholds-stability-and-welfare/


Petitioner Name: The State of Jharkhand.
Respondent Name: Sandeep Kumar.
Judgment By: Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Kumar.
Place Of Incident: Jharkhand.
Judgment Date: 06-03-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: the-state-of-jharkha-vs-sandeep-kumar-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-06-03-2024.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Custodial Deaths and Police Misconduct
See all petitions in Judgment by Vikram Nath
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjay Kumar
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category

Similar Posts