'Magistrate did not realise cops' pressure of work'

A sessions court has absolved two Delhi Police officials of the offence of intentionally not arresting an accused in an assault case, observing that the magisterial court here issued coercive direction against them without realising the "pressure of work" on cops.
The court made the remark while allowing the revision plea of a Station House Officer of Nangloi Police Station and a Sub Inspector of Govindpuri Police Station against a metropolitan magistrate's order which had said that offence under section 221 (intentional omission to apprehend on the part of public servant bound to apprehend) of IPC was made out against them.

"It appears from the impugned order as well as other orders of the Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) passed earlier and challenged before this court by way of this revision petition that the MM without distinguishing between the 'bonafide' and 'malafide' lapses on the part of the police officials gets irked by the slightest and smallest lapses on their part.
"And issues coercive directions against them without even realizing the pressure of work which exists on the police officials in discharge of their official duties," Additional Sessions Judge Lokesh Kumar Sharma said.
A magisterial court had in its October this year order held that the two cops had committed the offence under section 221 IPC by intentionally not bringing a man Shamsuddin Malik, accused in an assault case, before the court.

The offence is punishable with upto two years imprisonment or fine or both.

In their revision plea, the cops had contended that non- bailable warrant issued against Malik could not be executed because he was admitted in a drug rehabilitation centre and the incharge of the centre did not hand over his custody without advice of the doctor concerned.
The sessions court, while allowing their plea, said, "From the facts, as appearing on record, it has been clearly established that there was no malafide or dishonest intention on the part of the petitioners in not apprehending the accused who was otherwise admitted in the de-addiciton centre undergoing medical treatment for his habit of alcoholism."

It also said it has not been mentioned by the magistrate in his order as to what unlawful gain or advantage would have been derived by the petitioners (cops) in not apprehending or arresting the accused.
"Inviewoftheaforesaidreasons,Iamoftheconsidered opinion thatimpugnedordersuffersfrompatentillegality and cannotsustainany further.Accordingly,therevisionpetition isallowedandimpugnedorders aresetasideandrecalled," the court said.