SLP against HC transfer order of HP DGP: Kundu’s defence fuels Shimla eatery blast case speculations
Shimla, Jan 20,
The defence taken by HP DGP in the Supreme court while contesting against his transfer order given by the State high court, has fueled speculations about the Shimla eatery blast again. Himachal Pradesh Director General of Police Sanjay Kundu plead in the Supreme court, “In this backdrop, the petitioner has alleged that the SP Shimla was on inimical terms arising out of his communications to the State Government in regard to SP Shimla’s handling of the blast.” In a 14 paged order passed while setting aside the transfer order of HP DGP, the Division bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud comprising of justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Mishra have observed this pleading by the petitioner, in para 24.
The court in its order earlier noted, “Before proceeding further, it is necessary to note the submissions which have been urged by Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in relation to the imputations against the SP, Shimla,” noted the order. Adding,” A blast is alleged to have taken place on 18 July 2023 in Shimla resulting in the loss of two lives and injury to several others. The blast was investigated under the supervision of the SP Shimla who, according to the petitioner, sought to cover it up as an accidental blast of an LPG cylinder.”
The para 23 of the apex court order further quoted,” The petitioner is stated to have addressed a communication to the Additional Secretary in the Union Ministry of Home Affairs requesting an investigation by the National Bomb Data Centre of the National Security Guard. In subsequent communications to the Chief Secretary on 10 August 2023 and 1 September 2023, the petitioner alleged negligence in the post-blast investigation by the SP Shimla and requisitioned the NSG for investigation, suspecting the use of an IED including RDX which was allegedly detected at the site of the blast,” it added.
Noteworthy that a blast occurred on the Mall road situated food eatery Himachali Rasoi on July 18, 2023. The blast occurred at 7:12 pm near the Police Control Room, claiming lives of two individuals and injuring many others, with extensive damage to 7 to 8 shops. In the aftermath of the incident, a case was registered at Police Station, Sadar, Shimla, under sections 336, 337, and 304 A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The initial investigation was done by the city police, terming it an LPG blast. It is worthwhile to mention that even a reputed SFL lab of Junga has categorically denied any use of Improvised Explosive Device and RDX including any other chemical.
However later the investigation was handed to the National Bomb Data Centre (NBDC). The NSG investigation revealed that the explosion on Shimla’s Mall Road was not a result of gas leakage but rather involved the use of explosive substance. “The NSG team investigating the matter said in a media statement that residuals of High intensity explosive were found from the investigation.
Though while directing the analysis the apex court has stated in the order,” At this stage, we are desisting from expressing any opinion on the allegations which are made against the petitioner or, for that matter, the allegations that the petitioner has made against SP, Shimla. The SP Shimla is not present before this Court,” commented the bench. Adding,” It is, therefore, necessary to clarify that the submissions which have been made by the petitioner earlier, as recorded above, have not been commented upon in the course of this judgment.”
In para 33, the apex curt noted,” The correct course of action for the High Court would have been to recall its ex parte order dated 26 December 2023 and to commence the proceedings afresh so as to furnish both the petitioner and the complainant and other affected parties including the SP, Kangra, an opportunity to place their perspectives before it. Instead, the High Court, while deciding the recall application, heavily relied on the status report submitted by the SP, Shimla on 4 January 2024. The High Court has, in the course of its order, also relied on the earlier status reports which were referred to in its order dated 26 December 2023.”
“The impugned order suffers from a patent error of jurisdiction. The order was passed without compliance with the principles of justice, especially, the principle of audi alteram partem. The order dated 26 December 2023 had serious consequences, and it was passed without hearing the petitioner who stood to be affected by it. A post-decisional hearing of the kind conducted by the High Court lacks fresh and dispassionate application of mind to the merits of the recall application, and is for that very reason, likely to cause disquiet,” noted the court.
Further granting relief to petitioner Kundu the court noted,” The above direction of the High Court directing the shifting out of the petitioner from the post of DGP is set aside. The petitioner shall exercise no control whatsoever in respect of the investigation which is to be carried out by the Special Investigation Team. Instead of and in place of the direction of the High Court requiring the State Government to consider constituting an SIT, we issue a direction to the State Government to do so.”
Besides that, DGP Kundu got relief in the Supreme court but his pleading during the course of hearing has definitely raised interest pertaining to the investigation of the blast, stated a citizen Mohan.
Empower Independent Journalism – Join Us Today!
Dear Reader,
We’re committed to unbiased, in-depth journalism that uncovers truth and gives voice to the unheard. To sustain our mission, we need your help. Your contribution, no matter the size, fuels our research, reporting, and impact.
Stand with us in preserving independent journalism’s integrity and transparency. Support free press, diverse perspectives, and informed democracy.
Click [here] to join and be part of this vital endeavour.
Thank you for valuing independent journalism.
Warmly,
Vishal Sarin, Editor
