Delhi Court directs DCP to train SHO on basic law, procedure and ethics

New Delhi: A Delhi court has directed a deputy commissioner of Delhi police to give one week’s training to the SHO of a police station apprising him of basic law, procedure, and ethics after he failed to file reports with the requisite sanctions in a 2018 alleged murder case.

Additional sessions judge Sonu Agnihotri directed the DCP of Dwarka to conduct an inquiry against the station house officer (SHO) of Chhawla police station for filing a supplementary charge sheet without the required sanction from the concerned authorities and for “deliberately” not filing reports in the case.

“The ASI (assistant sub inspector) has produced supplementary charge sheet containing FSL (forensic science lab) result of ballistics. The same does not contain any sanction of DCP Dwarka,” the court said.

“Further, such supplementary charge sheet should have been filed before the concerned metropolitan magistrate for the purpose of taking cognisance under the Arms Act and should have been received by this court by way of committal. SHO of Chhawla police station does not appear to be aware of this basic procedure or is trying to play smart with the court,” it added.

The SHO is the investigating officer (IO) in the case in which three persons have been arrested for allegedly entering a man’s house and shooting his wife to death in 2018.

The court asked the DCP to file the status report on the training and the inquiry before it on September 4, the next date of hearing.

“Let a copy of this order be sent to DCP Dwarka with direction to give training of one week to SHO Chhawla PS to apprise him of basic law, procedure, and ethics. Perusal of record shows that SHO Chhawla PS is sending requests in the present matter consistently and is not appearing,” the court said.

The court was informed that the FSL report regarding the digital video recorder (DVR) has not been filed by the SHO even after one year of filing the charge sheet in 2018 and hence testimonies of witnesses in the case could not be recorded yet.

The court further said that perusal of record showed that though a supplementary charge sheet containing ballistic examination report and biological examination report has been filed on behalf of the SHO on March 13, 2019, it has been forwarded only by him and not by the concerned assistant commissioner of police, which is violative of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

“Further, the supplementary charge sheet should have been filed by the IO before the concerned area MM for purpose of taking cognisance under sections of the Arms Act. Very surprisingly, the supplementary charge sheet has been filed without any sanction from the DCP concerned. It appears that the SHO lacks basic knowledge of law,” the court said.