Abdul Rashid Khan
The police, prosecution and the judiciary are the three vital organs of any criminal justice system. The write up titled ‘An Acquittal that shocked all’ by Dr. Raja Muzafar Bhat, in a local daily was a worth read . He had rightly exposed the functioning of the system by citing an instance of public prosecutor of sessions court Budgam who was caught red handed by accepting illegal gratification from a complainant of murder case in 2014. How sad it is that a public prosecutor who represents the state, to defend the case in the court for its successful termination, fails to fulfill his duties. To strengthen the case, he instead making any effort to rectify the weak points in the final report of investigation did not mind demanding illegal gratification from the victim’s son. If the information of the author is correct, the injustice had started right from the day when the accused party in the said case, managed to influence the investigating agency for getting the offence u/s 302 RPC converted into 304 RPC. As per the write up if it is a fact that the four rape victims have also alleged that the public prosecutor had helped Gulzar Peer in obtaining the bail has further shaken the people’s trust.The author by citing one more instance of acquittal of Gulzar Peer has strengthened his concern for the failed justice delivery system.
If I am correct the public prosecutor is engaged on contractual basis and the previous government had therefore no hitch in attaching him with the concrned department immediately after he was involved in the corruption case. Even his continuation as public prosecutor in District & Sessions court, there after, also gives rise to many questions on the inaction of Law Department, law minister and the Government of the time. The acquittal of Gulzar Peer had also lead to mass protests by the public against the failure of the criminal justice system. The police had therefore no alternative but to detain him under preventive sections of law to maintain peace and Order in the area. The need for such action had risen only when the normal course of law had failed to bring the culprit to book for his involvement in such a heinous crime. In the past particularly after 1990, with the dawn of militancy in the state, the departments worst hit were the investigating agency and the prosecution. The reasons behind it are known to one and all. But the system did not show any improvement even after the restoration of normalcy in the valley. The conviction rate generally obtained by the prosecution in criminal cases is very low and has been seen as dismal particularly in TADA cases. One of the reasons being that the witnesses in some cases resile from the earlier statement deposed during investigation or some time the witnesses are won over by the accused party. The poor quality investigation and poor follow up action in the courts by both investigating and prosecution wing could be the other reasons. The delay in securing the presence of witnesses in courts by the concerned agency and prosecution also causes delay in the judicial determination of the case and some time it proves fatal for the success of the case.
Now there is a good news that honourable High court has stayed the acquittal of rape-accused ‘Gulzar peer’ in an appeal filed by the police. The directions of Division bench has provided a great relief to the victims of the case. The concerted efforts of the DAG assisted by CPO and SPO Budgam are also worth appreciating.
There is actually some inherent flaw in the system of appointment of public prosecutors. They are appointed on the contractual basis by the Law Department and therefore are not accountable to any authority. Though they work in the districts under the supervision of the District Magistrates who actually writes their annual performance reports without obtaining any comments from the concerned District Superintendents of police who would have been able to give correct assessment of their working. These reports are very important for their continuation as PPS. But mostly these reports are written in a very casual manner by DC’s who happen to be the District Magistrates also. The PPS are also not to be blamed as their services being contractual and temporary, they therefore have very little at stake.
The Police Department in J&K has a full fledged prosecution wing headed by a director. Every district has a chief prosecuting officer with a battery of prosecutors posted in the district attached with various courts. They are accountable and answerable as their working and performance is subject to the scrutiny of their higher ups. The new Government which has recently taken over the reigns of the state could consider the proposal of designating these district Chief Prosecuting officers as the Public Prosecutors to represent the state in criminal cases in the District & Session’s courts or formulate a standard criterion so that the PPS are appointed by the PSC on the regular basis after taking into account their merit and suitability, if the Government is interested in bringing some improvement in criminal justice system.
The author is IGP (rtd)
Follow our WhatsApp channel