Kiran Raj

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Director General of Police (DGP), Punjab, to submit an action plan to address the delays in police investigations, noting that over 79,000 First Information Reports (FIRs) remain unresolved. The Court stated the need for timely investigation and adherence to statutory deadlines, stating that such delays undermine public confidence in the justice delivery system.

The case arose from an application seeking revival of a petition (CRM-M-37149-2021) that was earlier dismissed based on assurances from the State that investigations into FIR No. 36, dated March 28, 2021, would be completed without delay. The FIR pertained to allegations under Sections 307, 379-B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

The petitioner approached the Court after investigations remained incomplete for over three years, with a challan filed only on December 9, 2024. Additionally, one of the accused, Bansi Lal, remained untraced.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that delay in the investigation, coupled with the lack of scientific methods to trace the accused, hampered the justice process. The Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Ferozepur, appeared before the Court but failed to provide satisfactory explanation for the delay in this case.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil recorded observations regarding systemic delays and inefficiencies in police investigations across Punjab. The Court noted that despite statutory deadlines, numerous investigations were pending without any valid extensions being sought.

The Court recorded: “Shocked at the staggering figure of 79,000 FIRs still awaiting logical conclusion despite the lapse of the statutory period, the State is called upon to submit an action plan.”

It further stated: “Delays of this magnitude erode public trust in law enforcement and hinder the delivery of justice. The State must adopt immediate corrective measures to address this backlog.”

Referring to the case at hand, the Court observed: “The investigation has remained incomplete for nearly three years. A key accused, Bansi Lal, is yet to be apprehended, and there has been no effective use of scientific techniques such as phone tracking or financial surveillance to trace his whereabouts.”

The Court stated that such delays reflect a lack of accountability and inefficiency within law enforcement agencies.

The Court issued the following directions:

1.  Action Plan by DGP, Punjab

The Court directed the DGP to file an affidavit within two weeks, which must include:

• A district-wise breakdown of pending FIRs.
• Details of the dates of FIR registrations and corresponding deadlines for investigations.
• A proposed timeline for the completion of investigations.

 The Court stated: “The affidavit must outline specific measures proposed by the State to improve the investigative process and reduce delays, particularly in cases where statutory limits have been exceeded.”

2. Supplementary Affidavit by SSP, Ferozepur

The SSP was instructed to submit a supplementary affidavit detailing the steps taken to apprehend Bansi Lal and the progress of the investigation in the specific case.

3. Further Monitoring

The matter is scheduled for further hearing on January 30, 2025, to review compliance with these directives. The Court stated: “The judiciary will continue to oversee the implementation of these measures to ensure accountability and transparency.”

The Court observed that the backlog of pending FIRs reflects broader inefficiencies in the State’s investigative processes. It stated:“This issue transcends individual cases and underscores the urgent need for systemic reform. Law enforcement agencies must prioritize compliance with statutory requirements to uphold the rule of law.”

The Court stated that timely investigations are crucial for maintaining public trust in the justice system. It stated: “Effective law enforcement is essential for ensuring public safety and safeguarding constitutional rights.”

The petitioner was represented by Advocate Beant Singh, while the State of Punjab was represented by Additional Advocate General A.D.S. Sukhija.

Case Title: Saraj v. State of Punjab & Another
Case Number: CRM-47174-2024 in CRM-M-37149-2021
Bench: Justice Sandeep Moudgil

[Read/Download order]