Karnataka High Court has made a firm decision not to quash proceedings against a police inspector accused of defaming the judiciary and disobeying a trial court’s anticipatory bail order. The controversy centers around V Harish, the then sub-inspector at Sarjapur police station, who faced allegations of not only defying a court order but also engaging in actions that brought disrepute to the judiciary.
The Karnataka High Court has made a firm decision not to quash proceedings against a police inspector accused of defaming the judiciary and disobeying a trial court’s anticipatory bail order. This case highlights the boundaries of conduct for law enforcement officials and reinforces the judiciary’s intolerance for disrespect and misconduct within its ranks.
The controversy centers around V Harish, the then sub-inspector at Sarjapur police station, who faced allegations of not only defying a court order but also engaging in actions that brought disrepute to the judiciary. The incident, which took place in July 2021, involved real-estate businessman Narayana Swamy, also known as JCB Narayan, who filed a private complaint leading to the inspector’s legal battle.
The complaint detailed a harrowing encounter where, upon being released on bail, Swamy was confronted by sub-inspector Harish and other officials at the DCP’s office in Koramangala, intent on arresting him for a different case. Despite being presented with the bail order, Harish reportedly tore it up, declaring, “he was the judge in his police station limits.” The situation escalated as Harish not only abused the sessions judge who granted the bail in derogatory language but also threatened Swamy with dire consequences at the Sarjapur police station, including pointing a revolver at him with threats of being labeled a rowdy and facing an encounter killing.
In his defense, Harish argued that the magistrate’s cognizance of the complaint was invalid in the absence of prior sanction under Section 170 of the Karnataka Police Act and Section 197 of the CrPC, claiming the offenses were committed in the line of official duty. However, Justice K Natarajan of the Karnataka High Court found compelling evidence against this claim, including CCTV footage, video recordings by the advocates, and photocopies of the bail orders, all of which painted a clear picture of Harish’s disregard for the court order.
“The petitioner, being a police officer, has defamed the court order, torn the court order, thrown the same on the floor and abused the sessions judge who granted anticipatory bail in filthy language,”
the court noted, emphasizing the gravity of Harish’s actions. The court’s observation went further to criticize Harish’s lack of respect for the law, stating,
“Such a police officer shall be tried and punished in accordance with the law, even the police department should have taken action against him by conducting a departmental inquiry for doing such type of activities. Such a person, like the petitioner, who has no respect for the law, cannot be shown any sympathy by the court and it is not a fit case for quashing the criminal proceedings against him.”
This ruling sends a clear message about the expectations of conduct for law enforcement officials and the consequences of flouting the judiciary’s authority. It underscores the importance of upholding the dignity of the court and adhering to its orders, reinforcing the principle that no one is above the law, not even those tasked with enforcing it. The Karnataka High Court’s decision not only addresses the misconduct of a single officer but also serves as a cautionary tale for all members of the police force, reminding them of the paramount importance of respecting the judiciary and the legal processes it oversees.
