Preserving the Rule of Law: Upholding Citizens’ Rights

No.285 of 2016 arising out of FIR No.116 dated 22.02.2016 u/S 148, 149, 186, 302, 307, 435, 436, 449, 395, 323, 326 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, Police Station-Jhajjar, titled “State of Haryana versus Sandeep @ Kala & Anr.”, pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar to the Competent Court in New Delhi.”

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/exceeding-jurisdiction-a-case-of-inappropriate-exercise-of-article-227/

(2) The case of the petitioners in a nutshell is that an agitation was carried out by members of the Jat community in the State of Haryana in 2016.

In the application for additional documents, it is sought to be established that, in fact, the first petitioner before this Court was examined as PW-2 and he has deposed in his deposition that he could not identify who the accused are. (6) Learned counsel for the petitioners, in fact, would submit that the order rejecting the application under Section 319 has been upheld by the High Court. 4 (9) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent-State, on the other hand, would point out that the Public Prosecutor has been appointed on 13.05.2022.

The principal reason for people to come together under the organization of the state is the fundamental principle that the State will be in a position to always protect the lives and properties of the citizens.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/captive-mines-not-exempted-from-customs-duty-for-power-projects-supreme-court-clarifies/

(14)

The principal mechanism for vindicating the rule of law and upholding the rights of the citizens is the judicial branch of the State.

One of the fundamental methods by which Rule of law is preserved consists of sanctions of which the criminal law is the principal branch. It is therefore, integral to the upholding of the integrity of the State itself that the access to justice which is also comprehended in the principle that an offence is committed against the State and the State therefore prosecutes the offender is always borne in mind.

Accordingly, we dispose of the petition as follows: (i) It will be open to the petitioners to approach the Director of Prosecution in case they believe that even the Special Public Prosecutor appointed is not discharging his duties in a fair and impartial manner.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/criminal/dereliction-of-duty-and-grave-lapses-a-legal-analysis/

The transfer petition is disposed of accordingly.

Case Title: SUNIL SAINI Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA (2023 INSC 715)

Case Number: T.P.(Crl.) No.-000125 / 2019

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *