JUDGMENT :

1. These two misc. petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have been preferred by the petitioners Devendra Kumar (the then Additional Superintendent of Police, Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar) and Shri Amarjeet Chawla (the then SHO, Police Station Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar) being aggrieved of the Judgment dated 08.09.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Special Court, Woman Atrocities and Dowry Cases), Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.17/2013 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Jaswinder Singh @ Jassi) whereby, the learned trial court, made certain adverse remarks against the petitioners and directed initiation of disciplinary proceedings against them.

The learned Trial Judge, after appreciating the evidence available on record, rendered the impugned Judgment concluding that the SHO Shri Amarjeet Chawla and the Additional Superintendent of Police Shri Devendra Kumar connived with the accused persons and managed cremation of dead body of Smt. Mandeep Kaur without the same being subjected to postmortem. The complainant was kept in dark and was fraudulently induced not to lodge the FIR. These two police officials did not get the inquiry under Section 174 Cr.P.C. conducted and also got a manipulated document (Ex.D/1) prepared by keeping the complainant in dark which proved that there was a collusion between the accused and the police officials to convert a case of murder, plain in simple, into accidental death. It was also held that both the police officials gave false statements while deposing on oath. The trial court held that:

“The defence taken by the accused in this case that the death was an accidental is totally unbelievable. The delay of filing FIR is on the part of the police and not the complainant. The complainant had given his signature on ExD1 under this impression that the police will initiate action but since the SHO Police station Anoop Garh PW7 Amar Jeet Chawla and I.O PW6 Devender A.S.P. had connived with the accused to save him, they did not register the FIR immediately and rather forged ExD1 by writing the contents in the favour of the accused and used this document later on to justify their malafide action for not getting the post mortem of the dead body.”

After concluding so, the learned trial court directed as below:

“Way the accused managed the local police to save himself from this brutal crime, is an glaring example of the misuse of power by the police , for which both the then SHO Police Station Amarjeet Chawala and the then A.S.P. Anoopgarh Devender Kumar deserve to be punished according to law. Both these police officers have tried to save the accused Jaswinder Singh who had committed the murder of his wife. If such police officers are left free with no action against them, then they can be a big threat to the criminal justice system and it will shake the faith of the public at large in the judicial system. A copy of this judgment be sent to D.G.P. Rajasthan police to take departmental action against these two police officers as per law and inform this court about the action taken by him.”

The above observations and directions given in the judgment dated 08.09.2014 are subject matter of challenge in these misc. petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

2. Shri Vineet Jain, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Pravin Vyas, Advocate representing the petitioner Devendra Kumar and Shri H.R. Chawla, learned counsel representing the petitioner Amarjeet Chawla, placed reliance on the following Supreme Court judgments :

(i) Manish Dixit & Others vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2001 SCC (Cri) 235; and

(ii) State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) Vs. Pankaj Chaudhary and Ors., reported in AIR 2018 SC 5412

and urged that the observations and directions, referred to supra, made by the learned trial court in the impugned Judgment, are totally unjust, arbitrary and unwarranted as the same are contrary to the correct factual position and were recorded without adhering to the principles of natural jus