Hate crime: Why is investigating officer playing hide and seek with court, SC asks UP

Why is your investigating officer playing “hide and seek” with this court, the Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Uttar Pradesh Government while expressing displeasure over the compliance affidavit filed by the police in a case of alleged hate crime in Noida in 2021.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta asked Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, who was appearing for Uttar Pradesh, as to why the police has not added section 153-B of the Indian Penal Code in the case. 

Section 153-B of the erstwhile IPC deals with the offence of imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration.

The top court said the law officer had on February 16 stated before it that from the allegations as set out in the complaint, the necessary ingredients of offences punishable under sections 153-B and 295-A of the IPC were made out and the FIR ought to have been registered for the said offences.

Section 295-A pertains to deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.

The top court was hearing a plea seeking a fair investigation and trial on a complaint by a senior citizen, who claimed that he was abused and tortured in an alleged hate crime in Noida in July 2021. During the hearing on Tuesday, Nataraj informed the bench that the trial court has allowed the police to conduct further investigation in the case and the police would add the necessary provisions.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner said the apex court had earlier said that offences under sections 153-B and 295-A of the IPC should have been added in the FIR.

“Section 153-B has been dropped again,” the counsel said.

“Why your IO (investigating officer) is playing hide and seek with this court?” the bench asked the state, while questioning why section 153-B was not added.

Nataraj assured the bench that the police would add section 153-B.

“We are not satisfied with the compliance affidavit filed by the respondent,” the bench said.

The top court said it was inclined to summon the IO but on Nataraj’s request, it was granting two weeks to ensure full compliance.

It posted the matter for hearing on May 19.

“Please advise your officers otherwise they will be in trouble. We have no fun in calling them and giving them a dressing down,” the bench told the law officer.

On February 16, the Uttar Pradesh Government told the top court that FIR in the case should have been registered for the offences, including under section 153-B.        

The apex court on February 3 questioned the state as to why appropriate provisions of the IPC were not invoked in the FIR lodged in the alleged hate crime in 2021.

Nataraj had earlier said the chargesheet was already filed in the case and the police would move an application for further investigation before the concerned court.

The petitioner’s counsel had earlier argued that an FIR ought to have been registered for the alleged offences punishable under sections 153-B and 295-A of the IPC.

The plea has sought initiation of appropriate departmental or punitive proceedings against some police officers of Gautam Buddh Nagar district for allegedly failing to comply with the preventive and remedial measures as directed by the apex court in one of its earlier verdicts.

The petitioner claimed in his plea that he was a victim of a “dastardly hate crime” in Noida where he was “abused, tortured and systematically stripped of his dignity” by a group of individuals on July 4, 2021.

Detailing the incident, the petitioner has said he was attacked and derogatory words related to his “religious identity” were hurled at him.

The plea claimed that the petitioner was attacked because of “his beard and ostensible Muslim identity”.