Constitutional concerns regarding the alleged police brutality: Punjab and Haryana High Court Order

Introduction

The recent order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CRM-M-16421-2025 highlights significant legal and constitutional concerns regarding the alleged police brutality against Col. Pushpinder Singh Bath, a serving Army officer. The case raises issues concerning the fair investigation of police misconduct, the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the need for judicial oversight in cases involving law enforcement excesses.

Download Order

Factual Background

The case pertains to an incident that occurred on the intervening night of March 13-14, 2025, when Col. Pushpinder Singh Bath and his son Angad Singh Bath were allegedly assaulted by police personnel in Patiala, Punjab. The attack was reportedly unprovoked and took place in a public area under CCTV surveillance. The petitioner claimed that despite making distress calls to the police control room and recording a statement on March 14, 2025, no immediate action was taken. Instead, an FIR was registered only on March 22, 2025, after a delay of eight days.

The petitioner contended that several police officials, including Inspectors Harry Boparai, Rauni Singh, Shaminder Singh, and Harjinder Dhillon, were involved in the assault. He further alleged that his mobile phone and official identification card were forcibly taken and later returned by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Patiala. The delay in lodging the FIR and the police’s failure to preserve crucial CCTV footage led the petitioner to seek a transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

Legal Issues Involved

1. Delay in FIR Registration and Investigative Lapses
   • The petitioner’s complaint was recorded on March 14, 2025, yet the FIR was registered only on March 22, 2025. This undue delay raised concerns about the fairness and transparency of the police investigation.
   • The court noted that despite clear medico-legal reports indicating serious injuries, the police failed to act promptly, which casts doubt on their impartiality.
2. Fair Investigation and Judicial Oversight
   • The Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasized the need for fair and impartial investigations, especially when police officers are accused.
   • The court directed the State Government to submit a report regarding the CCTV footage, explain the delay in FIR registration, and disclose the name of the officer who refused to act on the complaint.
3. Abuse of Power and Violation of Fundamental Rights
   • The alleged custodial violence and police high-handedness violate the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
   • The petitioner’s claim that the police officials were intoxicated at the time of the assault further aggravates the seriousness of the allegations.
4. Judicial Precedents and Need for Police Reforms
   • The Supreme Court, in cases like Prakash Singh v. Union of India [(2006) 8 SCC 1], has repeatedly emphasized the need for police reforms to curb abuse of power.
   • The High Court’s observations reflect a growing concern about police accountability and the need for institutional safeguards against misuse of authority.

Court’s Observations and Directions

The Punjab and Haryana High Court expressed deep concern over the lapses in the investigation, highlighting that:

• The failure to register an FIR despite multiple complaints erodes public trust in law enforcement agencies.
• The absence of immediate action and the attempt to shield the accused officers indicate possible bias.
• The preservation of material evidence, including CCTV footage, is crucial to ensure a fair trial.
• The court directed the State to file an affidavit addressing the delays and lapses in the investigation.

Conclusion

The case of Col. Pushpinder Singh Bath underscores the critical role of judicial oversight in cases involving police misconduct. The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s intervention in ensuring a fair and transparent investigation is a step toward upholding the rule of law and protecting citizens’ rights against state excesses. The matter is set to be heard further on March 28, 2025, with the expectation that the State will provide satisfactory explanations for the procedural lapses.

This case serves as a reminder of the urgent need for police reforms and stricter accountability mechanisms to prevent such incidents in the future.

References

1. CRM-M-16421-2025, Punjab & Haryana High Court Order dated March 25, 2025.
2. Prakash Singh v. Union of India [(2006) 8 SCC 1] – Supreme Court directives on police reforms.
3. Article 21 of the Constitution of India – Right to life and personal liberty.
4. Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) provisions applicable in the case.

The final verdict and its implications will be closely watched as a precedent for handling similar cases of alleged police misconduct.