No probe due to gag ordinace, now HC issues notices to cops

Jaipur: Seeking justice for his son’s death in an alleged police encounter, a father from Bharatpur has moved Rajasthan High Court demanding an independent investigation against cops involved in the encounter.

Kishan Singh was compelled to go to the high court due the controversial gag ordinance which bans a magistrate from ordering an investigation against a government servant without getting prior approval from the government.

The high court finally issued notices to the then SHO Kama police station Rakesh Kumar Yadav, Deeg police station SHO Kanhayalal of Bharatpur district and six other police personnel on a petition by Kishan Singh, the victim’s father.

Vijay Dutt Sharma, counsel for the petitioner, said, Ashok Gurjar was shot dead by Deeg police on August 30 this year. He had gone to Varai on his motor cycle for the treatment of his daughter. About 3 pm, one of the villagers received information that Deeg police had killed him in an encounter. Two persons accompanying Ashok also informed that they were on way laid by the police team. When Ashok stopped the motor cycle on the way side for urinating about three kilometres from Deeg police station, a police team reached the spot and fired at Ashok killing him on the spot.

But the police cooked up a story that Ashok and his two other accomplices had fired at the police party from country made weapons. Accidently one of the bullets hit Ashok from his own weapon leading to his death. The petitioner first approached civil judge and judicial magistrate Deeg on September 11 but it dismissed the petition on the ground of gag order and later filed a complaint at additional district and session’s court, but the ADJ court also dismissed the petition in September 27 on similar ground.

The judicial magistrate court in its order dated September 11 said, “ it is pertinent to mention that Rajasthan has recently promulgated Criminal Laws (Rajasthan Amendment ) Ordinance 2017 which is currently in force. . . Therefore the petitioner’s complaint under section 156(3) CrPC is being rightly rejected and dismissed.”