'Might Disband UP Police': SC Lambasts State Cops Over 'Faulty' FIR, Says 'This Nonsense Has To Stop'

The Supreme Court on Wednesday came down heavily on Uttar Pradesh Police over alleged irregularities in a criminal investigation, questioning the credibility of a probe where an accused allegedly caught at the spot was initially not named in the FIR.

A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva said that it might disband the UP Police and transfer all of their cases to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), as reported by Bar and Bench.

“In everything you have an agenda. How will people trust you if this is how you proceed with matters? It is better if we ask CBI to step in all UP Police investigations. We might as well disband the UP Police. This nonsense has to stop at some point,” the Bench observed.

The remarks came while hearing a petition filed by a complainant appearing in person, who alleged that the police investigation was biased and that key facts were ignored while registering the case.

The petitioner told the court that after a motorcycle-related incident, she had caught the rider and handed him over to the police. However, the FIR was registered against an “unknown” motorcycle rider instead of naming the person who had allegedly been apprehended.

Questioning the police’s decision, the Bench asked why the accused’s identity was left out despite him being available to investigators.

“FIR was registered against unknown persons? Why did you write unknown if the person was caught at the spot? Why did you register FIR against an unknown motorcycle rider if he was caught on the spot? How will people trust the police?” the court asked.

The petitioner further alleged that after the Allahabad High Court sought a status report, the rider’s name was later included in the chargesheet but he was subsequently given a clean chit. She also raised questions over the motorcycle’s registration details, claiming that the vehicle had no number plate when it was seized but later appeared with a registration number during the investigation.

The Bench questioned the manner in which the investigation was handled and criticised what it described as an attempt to alter the course of the case.

“Toeing the line is one thing but bending over backwards. And this kind of cover up job? Less said the better,” the court remarked.

The Supreme Court also questioned why an accused allegedly caught at the scene was not named in the FIR.

“You catch the accused at the spot but you don’t want to name him in the FIR. Perhaps if the equation works out you can substitute the name, bring in one of your own names, you must keep a list of accused in different FIRs whoever has gotten lesser number of FIRs you can include his name. Is that how it works there?” the Bench asked.

The court found the affidavit submitted by the UP Police unsatisfactory and directed the concerned police officer to appear during the next hearing with a detailed explanation, Bar and Bench reported.

“We found the affidavit filed by UP Police to be completely uninspiring. The officer to be present in court in the next hearing with a better affidavit explaining as to why the FIR was registered against an unknown motorcycle rider when it is an admitted fact that the said motorcycle rider was apprehended at the spot,” the Bench said.