In a startling observation, the Supreme Court of India remarked on a “complete breakdown of rule of law in Uttar Pradesh,” triggered by the state police’s frequent practice of converting civil disputes into criminal cases. The comment came during a hearing on Monday, presided over by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan.
The court’s stern rebuke followed revelations concerning the inappropriate use of criminal proceedings to handle civil disputes, notably in a case involving the filing of an FIR by the Gautam Budh Nagar district police. The Chief Justice and his fellow justices directed both the Director General of Police and the Station House Officer of the implicated police station to submit detailed affidavits explaining the rationale behind such actions.
Chief Justice Khanna expressed dismay, stating, “There is a complete breakdown of rule of law in Uttar Pradesh. Converting a civil matter into a criminal case is simply not acceptable.” The issue surfaced when it was disclosed that the FIR was a strategy to expedite a long-standing civil matter.
Highlighting the absurdity of the situation, the Chief Justice added, “This is wrong what is happening in UP. Everyday civil suits are being converted to criminal cases. It is absurd, merely not giving money cannot be turned into an offence.”
In a move to underscore the seriousness of the matter, the bench ordered the investigating officer (IO) involved to appear in the witness box during the trial, to provide a justified basis for initiating criminal charges. “We will direct the IO to come to the witness box. Let the IO stand in the witness box and make out a criminal case…this is not the way you file chargesheets,” the Chief Justice declared, emphasizing the need for a corrective lesson.
Further complicating the case is the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the criminal proceedings against the accused, Debu Singh and Deepak Singh, who had approached the apex court following the Allahabad High Court’s refusal to quash the criminal charges against them. However, the court allowed the continuation of the cheque bounce case under existing financial misconduct allegations.
