Yesterday, On 23rd September, The Orissa High Court asked the State to outline measures it will adopt to protect the dignity of soldiers, following an incident where an army officer and his lawyer-fiancée assaulted. Additionally, the Court has prohibited the media from disclosing their identities to safeguard their privacy. It has also sought a report on the functioning of CCTV cameras in police stations, emphasizing the need for transparency and accountability in such cases involving security personnel.
Cuttack: The Orissa High Court on Monday directed the State to provide a response on whether it intends to implement measures to protect the dignity of armed forces personnel. This comes after an alleged incident where an army major and his lawyer-fiancée assaulted by police officers at the Bharatpur police station in Odisha.
In its order dated September 23, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh and Justice Savitri Ratho observed that the case involved the “prestige and dignity” of an army officer.
Read Also: Orissa High Court Orders Doctors to Use Legible Handwriting for Medical Documents
The Court stated,
“As the incident also concerns the prestige and dignity of an army officer, who was on leave, the Court would like to know from the State Government as to what steps it intends to take to protect the dignity of the personnel of the Armed Forces, in such situations,”
The Bench also requested a report on the status of CCTV camera installations in police stations, after being informed that the Bharatpur police station lacked such surveillance. The Court pointed out that this omission violated the Supreme Court’s directives requiring CCTV coverage in all police stations across the country.
The Advocate General informed the Court that out of Odisha’s 650 police stations, 559 equipped with CCTV cameras, while some newly constructed stations were still without this facility.
As a result, the Court directed Additional Director General of Police, Dayal Gangwar, to submit a report by October 8 detailing the availability of CCTV cameras in all police stations and outposts in the state.
The Court stated,
“If possible, Mr. Gangwar shall be required to explain the scheme of positioning of the CCTV cameras in the police stations. If required, we shall issue further directions to ensure that the Supreme Court’s direction in the cases noted above are fully complied with, depending upon the nature of report which is submitted by Mr. Gangwar,”
Due to the sensitive nature of the case, the Court imposed restrictions on the publication of the names of the army officer and his fiancée across media and social media platforms.
The Court stated,
“Since we have noticed that their names and identities are being disclosed in the print, electronic, and social media, we consider it proper in the facts and circumstances to restrain all concerned from publishing their names and identities on either print, electronic, or social media, in any manner,”
The case revolves around allegations that the army officer and his lawyer fiancée were tortured by police officers when they visited the Bharatpur police station on September 14 to file a complaint about a road rage incident. The lawyer also reported that she sexually assaulted at the police station.
The High Court initiated a suo motu case after receiving a letter from another army officer, Lieutenant General PS Shekhawat, regarding the incident. In its September 23 order, the Court expressed surprise that the police had filed a criminal complaint against the couple, alleging attempted murder of police personnel, despite it being clear that the couple had visited the station to lodge a complaint.
The Court informed that two additional cases have been registered in connection with the incident one against the police officers accused of assaulting the couple, and another related to the road rage incident. It was further submitted that all three cases are now under the investigation of the Crime Branch, supervised by the Additional Director General of Police of the Crime Branch.
The Court acknowledged these developments with approval and noted that it would refrain from commenting on the investigation unless there are exceptional or compelling circumstances. Additionally, the Court pointed out that a commission of inquiry, led by a retired High Court judge, also examining the matter.
Read Also: Orissa High Court Criticizes Cuttack Police and DMET Over Medical Negligence Case
The Court remarked,
“In the present suo motu proceeding in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, the Court will generally confine itself to the issues concerning facilities available in various police stations and police outposts in the State of Odisha,”
The case scheduled for its next hearing on October 8.
Senior Advocate Gautam Misra appeared as Amicus Curiae, assisted by advocate A Dash. Representing the State and other respondents Advocate General Pitambar Acharya, Additional Government Advocates L Samantaray and Saswat Das, Senior Advocate Durga Prasad Nanda, and Advocate M Dwibedi.