Kashmir Impulse Desk

Srinagar, July 28

A Sessions Court in Srinagar has set aside criminal proceedings initiated by a magistrate against Srinagar’s Senior Superintendent of Police, G V Sundeep Chakravarthy, while directing the police and lower courts to adopt a more effective system for executing summons and warrants.

The ruling came in a criminal revision petition filed by the SSP challenging an order issued by the City Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Srinagar.

The 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Srinagar, Naushad Ahmad Khan, allowed the petition and overturned the magistrate’s order.

The magistrate had initiated proceedings under Sections 210(1)(c) and 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, citing repeated failures by police to execute judicial warrants and notices in a pending complaint.

The revisional court said the magistrate was justified in expressing concern over delays, noting that timely execution of warrants was essential to the functioning of the criminal justice system.

However, it said certain remarks in the magistrate’s order suggesting that the SSP had “wilfully” failed to execute warrants, was an “accomplice” or the “biggest impediment” to justice amounted to conclusions being drawn before the statutory opportunity of hearing had been provided.

The court said such observations could create an impression of prejudgment and undermine the fairness of proceedings.

It stressed that judicial concerns about non-compliance were legitimate but that observations should remain measured and confined to what was necessary for adjudication.

The court described the judiciary and police as complementary pillars of the criminal justice system, with courts issuing judicial directions and police responsible for their implementation.

It said public confidence in the justice system depended on mutual respect, constitutional discipline and cooperation between the two institutions.

While setting aside the proceedings against the SSP, the court issued administrative directions aimed at improving the execution of judicial processes in Srinagar.

It said summons, bailable warrants, non-bailable warrants and other processes should ordinarily be sent directly to the relevant station house officer, or in exceptional cases to the Additional Superintendent of Police (Headquarters), rather than being routed through the SSP’s office.

Station House Officers were directed to personally ensure timely execution and submit compliance reports within prescribed deadlines.

Where execution was not possible, detailed reasons were to be communicated to the relevant court without delay.

The SSP was directed to issue standing instructions to subordinate officers and establish an effective monitoring mechanism so that no warrant or summons remained unattended without valid justification.

The court also advised magistrates to route judicial processes through officers with immediate territorial jurisdiction to reduce administrative delays.

It set aside the magistrate’s July 6 order and expunged adverse observations against the SSP concerning alleged deliberate misconduct, obstruction of justice, habitual disobedience and failure of the police machinery.

At the same time, the court said the magistrate’s concern over delays in executing judicial processes was bona fide and stemmed from the duty to uphold the authority of the courts.