An incident of custodial assault on an army officer and his fiancée, a lawyer, in Bharatpur police station in Bhubaneshwar has caused the High Court of Orissa to take suo moto cognizance of  the issue. The instant matter was initiated by the Lieutenant General, PS Shekhawat, AVSM, SM, General Officer Commanding & Colonel of the MECH INF REGT, Madhya Bharat Area, who wrote a letter to the Chief Justice of Orissa  urging the court to take suo moto action on the issue.

Facts of the present case as revealed in the letter state that an Army officer and his fiancée went to Bharatpur Police Station at around 1:00 AM on September 15th, 2024, to file a complaint about miscreants who harassed them. Rather than registering their complaint they allegedly humiliated, molested, and physically abused the fiancée. The officer was detained without charges for 14 hours and an FIR was filed against the couple accusing them of attempting to murder police officers. A medical reports from the Institute of Medical Science and SUM Hospital indicated injuries on the fiancée, but a medical examination conducted later at Capital Hospital was allegedly manipulated to show no injuries. The fiancée remains in judicial custody, while the officer was released after military intervention. Despite complaints of pain, the fiancée was initially denied medical assistance while in jail, and only after intervention of Orissa High Court, Cuttack was she transferred to AIIMS Bhubaneswar for treatment. The Inspector-in-Charge (IIC) of Bharatpur Police Station is accused of sexually abusing the fiancée.

Appearing on behalf of the  State of Orissa,   Advocate General Pitambar Acharya, submitted that, considering the gravity of the incident, the Director General of Police had transferred the case to the Crime Branch. The Advocate General further informed the court that the State Government had appointed a Commission of Inquiry headed by retired Judge Justice C.R. Dash of the Orissa High Court, to conduct an inquiry in the matter and file a report within 60 days. The AG also stated that even though there are 650 police stations in the state of Odisha, only 559 are equipped with CCTV cameras. 

Expressing their displeasure and consternation  over the issue the court noted that, “What is disturbing to this Court, after having seen the sequence of events, that admittedly two persons had entered into the police station, apparently with no intention to commit any crime, rather to lodge a complaint. What happened inside the police station is a matter which is under investigation. It is, however, surprising that they came out of the police station with an FIR registered against them alleging commission of offence of attempt to murder the police personnel. It is an admitted fact that the concerned police station does not have the facility of CCTV camera. This is despite the Supreme Court’s directions issued in the cases of D.K. Basu Vs. State of West Bengal reported in (2015) 1 SCC 744, Paramvir Singh Saini Vs. Baljit Singh and Others, reported in (2020) 7 SCC 397 and (2021) 1 SCC 184.’’ 

After due consideration of facts and circumstances of the case the Court ordered the Addl. D.G. of Police (Modernisation) Odisha, Cuttack, Mr. Dayal Gangwar, I.P.S. to submit a report by 8th October 2024, based on information available at the headquarters regarding the presence of CCTV facilities in all police stations and outposts across the state with directions that  he would  also have  to explain the scheme of positioning of the CCTV cameras in the police stations. Depending on the report submitted the court  stated that it would  give instructions for full compliance with the Supreme Court's direction. In their order the court also observed that, “as the incident also concerns the prestige and dignity of an army officer, who was on leave, the Court would like to know from the State Government as to what steps it intends to take to protect the dignity of the personnel of the Armed Forces, in such situations. 

We have consciously not mentioned the names of the persons, who had visited the police station on 15.09.2024, in the present order. 

Since we have noticed that their names and identities are being disclosed in the print, electronic and social media, we consider it proper in the facts and circumstances to restrain all concerned from publishing their names and identities on either print, electronic or social media, in any manner.’’

The court also stated that, “It is needless to say that power and duty of the Investigating Agency to investigate into a cognizable offence is statutory and unless there are exceptional circumstances, it is not desirable for the Court to interfere. We expect that the Investigating Agency shall act independently and fairly. There is no reason why this Court should monitor the investigation.” 

The matter is  now  listed on  8^th October , 2024.

Advocate for the Petitioner: Senior Advocate Gautam Misra (Amicus Curiae), assisted by Advocate A. Dash.

Advocate for the Respondent: Advocate General Pitambar Acharya, Addl. Govt. Advocate Samantaray, Addl. Govt. Advocate Saswat Das, 

Senior Advocate Durga Prasad Nanda, assisted by Advocate M. Dwibedi. 

Case Details: Registrar Judicial, Orissa High Court, Cuttack vs. Government of Odisha, and Others. SUO MOTU W.P.(C) No. 23735 of 2024 Judgement