1. Court considered compliance with directions on selection and minimum tenure of DGP and minimum tenure of IG and other police officers. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2011 Supreme(SC) 1481
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.H. Kapadia, CJI., Aftab Alam, K.S. P. Radhakrishnan, JJ.
Prakash Singh and Others - Petitioners
Versus
Union of India and Others - Respondents
Writ Petitions (C) No. 310 of 1996 with Nos. 417 of 2010 and 42 of 2011
Decided On : 11-04-2011
The court emphasized the necessity of functionally segregating the investigative wing of the police from the law and order wing to prevent extraneous influence and preserve the rule of law.
Headnote:(A) Police Reforms - Functional segregation of the Investigative Wing from the Law and Order Wing - Insulation of the investigative wing from extraneous influence is essential to sustain the principle of the rule of law. (Para 1)
(B) Police Reforms - Selection and minimum tenure of high-ranking police officers - Implementation of directions regarding the minimum tenure of the Director General of Police and Inspector General of Police. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
The court was overseeing the implementation of directions related to police reforms. The government requested additional time to take instructions on the functional segregation of the investigative wing from the law and order wing, as well as on the selection and minimum tenure of high-ranking police officers. Additionally, an interlocutory application filed by a state government was brought before the court.
Findings of Court:
The court granted one week's time to the government to obtain instructions regarding the implementation of the directions on segregation of wings and tenure of officers. The interlocutory application was dismissed as withdrawn, with the court noting it was unrelated to the implementation of the mandated police reforms.
Issues: Whether the investigative wing of the police should be functionally segregated from the law and order wing to ensure independence and the rule of law.
Ratio Decidendi: The separation of the investigative wing from the law and order wing is a paramount necessity to ensure that investigations are insulated from external influences, thereby upholding the rule of law.
Result: Matter adjourned for one week; interlocutory application dismissed as withdrawn.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Matter adjourned for one week; interlocutory application dismissed as withdrawn; subject matter of IA not related to implementation of directions. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 )
3. Is the subject matter of the interlocutory application related to the implementation of police reform directions?
No, the court clarified that the interlocutory application has nothing to do with the implementation of the directions given in Prakash Singh v. Union of India. (Para 5 )
ORDER :
S.H. Kapadia, CJI., Aftab Alam, K.S. P. Radhakrishnan, JJ.
With regard to the implementation of Direction No. 4 under the Heading "Separation of Investigation", given in the case of Prakash Singh v. Union of India , 2006 (8) SCC 1, learned Solicitor General seeks time to take instructions on the question of functional segregation of the Investigative Wing from the Law and Order Wing of the Police. Today, as the situation stands, there is no such segregation. Briefly, the suggestion is that the Investigation Police should be separated from the Law and Order Police and the former should be insulated from any extraneous influence which is the paramount need today to sustain the principle of rule of law.
2. Similarly, with regard to Direction Nos. 2 and 3 under the headings "Selection and minimum tenure of DGP" and "Minimum tenure of IG of police and other officers" respectively, one week's time is sought by the learned Solicitor General to take instructions. Accordingly, the matter shall stand over for one week.
3. Place this matter on 18th April, 2011. I.A. No....of 2011 (filed on behalf of State of Karnataka) in W.P. (C) No. 310 of 1996:
4. The interlocutory application is dismissed as withdrawn.
5. We have made it clear to the Learned Counsel for the State of Karnataka that the subject-matter of this interlocutory application has nothing to do with the implementation of the Directions given by this Court in the case of Prakash Singh v. Union of India , 2006 (8) SCC 1.
