Police personnel in plain clothes firing upon car driver cannot be considered as official duty: SC

New Delhi: The conduct of police personnel surrounding a civilian vehicle in plain clothes and jointly firing upon its occupant cannot be considered under duties of public order or effecting lawful arrest, the Supreme Court has said, dismissing a plea of nine Punjab cops to quash murder charges against them in an alleged fake encounter case.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta also restored the destruction of evidence charge levelled on Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Parampal Singh for directing the removal of the number plate of the car after the firing incident in 2015 in which a driver was killed.

It has been held that the cloak of official duty cannot be extended to acts intended to thwart justice, the court observed, noting that prior sanction was not required to prosecute the DCP and other police personnel for their alleged actions.

The bench in its April 29 order uploaded recently dismissed the appeals of nine police personnel challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order of May 20, 2019, where it refused to quash the case against them.

The apex court said having gone through the material placed on record, the court is of the view that no case is made out for interference with the impugned order of the high court.

The bench rejected the submission of eight police personnel that cognisance of complaint against them cannot be taken as it was barred under Section 197 of CrPC under which prior permission was needed to prosecute public servants.

"Equally untenable is the submission that cognisance was barred for want of sanction under Section 197 CrPC. The petitioners stand accused of surrounding a civilian vehicle in plain clothes and jointly firing upon its occupant.

"Such conduct, by its very nature, bears no reasonable nexus to the duties of maintaining public order or effecting lawful arrest," it said.

The bench further said, "The availability of official firearms, or even an erroneous official objective cannot transmute acts wholly outside the colour of authority into those done while acting or purporting to act in discharge of official duty."

Dealing with the case involving DCP Parampal Singh, the bench said an act that is per se directed to erasing potential evidence, if ultimately proved, cannot be regarded as reasonably connected with any bona-fide police duty.

"The test consistently applied by this court is whether the impugned act bears a direct and inseparable nexus to official functions.