The Kerala High Court on Monday slammed the State Police Chief (SPC) for filing a report justifying the conduct of the former Pink police officer who had allegedly humiliated an 8-year-old girl and her father in a public road at Attingal in the capital district.
When the petition was filed by the girl seeking a directive to take stringent action against the former Pink police officer, Justice Devan Ramachandran said that the report was exceedingly generalised and made with a subjective tenor.
During the hearing, the court observed that “khaki always goes in favour of khaki.” The court said that in the report, the SPC was trying to create an obfuscatory curtain, which was unfortunate.
The court said that after noticing the entire incident that happened on August 27, the SPC had stated that no criminal action was required against the police officer even with specific reference to Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The SPC said in his report that no case under the Act or any other criminal provision had been made out against the officer.
The court said that the report was completely silent on whether any other provisions of law, including the IPC, would be applicable in the case. The SPC said in the report that the officer had been transferred to Kollam and she was asked to serve in a non-uniformed post.
However, the report did not say whether this was done by way of punishment or as to what provision of the law was followed for doing this, except saying that she was also asked to attend behavioural training, the court said.
The court observed that instead of trying to support or justify the conduct of the civil police officer, the SPC must ensure that every officer acted with empathy and responsibility towards the fellow citizen.
Government action
The court, therefore, asked the government what it proposed to do to assuage the feelings of the minor girl and restore her trust and belief in humanity and in the police force.
In an affidavit, Rajitha, the police officer, had ‘profoundly and profusely’ tendered her apology to the child and her family as well as the court for her actions. Her counsel submitted that his client was now a changed person who would not even dream of doing anything as alleged against her now.
