'State can't be party to misuse of police machinery'
New Delhi: Observing that the state cannot be a party to misuse of police machinery, the Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the criminal proceedings against a woman and took strong note of the filing of four FIRs against her after she accused Lok Insaf Party MLA of Punjab, Simarjeet Singh Bains, of rape.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justices AS Bopanna and Hima Kohli was hearing two separate pleas filed by the lawmaker and the woman who had accused the MLA of raping her.
The top court, which stayed the judicial proceedings in four cases lodged against the woman, also extended by a week the protection against arrest to the Lok Insaf Party MLA.
The Bench, during the hearing, was critical of filing criminal cases against the woman after she had moved the trial court alleging rape by the MLA.
"What is happening in your state? How many cases have been filed against the lady? Now he wants anticipatory bail and the lady should go to jail. You (state) can't be a party to such kind of misuse of police machinery," the Bench said.
Advocate General D S Patewalia, appearing for the Punjab government, said the state does not have much role in the dispute which seems to be between two parties, but he will seek instruction and file a response in the case.
The state's law officer, however, said that as the guardian of the law, the state has a duty to protect it. At the outset, the bench referred to the allegations against the MLA and asked senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the lawmaker, about them. Have you seen your client's activity? How your man is harassing people, he is a public representative, MLA for two times, is this the way to behave. I want the advocate general of Punjab to appear in this matter, the Bench said.
Rohatgi said the MLA was innocent and the cases against the woman have been filed by other people and he has no role in them moreover, she has been running a job racket for getting people employment in Canada.
The Bench stayed the criminal proceedings against the woman for two weeks, protected the MLA for one week, and listed the cases after seven days for further hearing.
