'Why investigating officer is playing hide & seek', SC pulls up UP govt on dropping charges in Noida hate crime

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Uttar Pradesh government as to why its investigating officer was playing "hide and seek" with the court, and expressed displeasure over the compliance affidavit filed by the police in a case of alleged hate crime in Noida in 2021.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta asked Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, as to why the police has not added section 153-B of the Indian Penal Code in the case.

Section 153-B of the erstwhile IPC deals with the offence of imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration.

The court said the law officer had on February 16 stated before it that from the allegations as set out in the complaint, the necessary ingredients of offences punishable under sections 153-B and 295-A of the IPC were made out and the FIR ought to have been registered for the said offences.

Section 295-A pertains to deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.

The court was hearing a plea seeking a fair investigation and trial on a complaint by a senior citizen, who claimed that he was abused and tortured in an alleged hate crime in Noida in July 2021.

Nataraj said that the trial court has allowed the police to conduct further investigation in the case and the police would add the necessary provisions.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner said the apex court had earlier said that offences under sections 153-B and 295-A of the IPC should have been added in the FIR.

"Section 153-B has been dropped again," the counsel said.

"Why your IO is playing hide and seek with this court?" the bench asked the state, while questioning why section 153-B was not added.

Even though Nataraj assured the bench that the police would add section 153-B, the bench said, "We are not satisfied with the compliance affidavit filed by the respondent."

The court said it was inclined to summon the IO but on Nataraj's request, it was granting two weeks to ensure full compliance.

It posted the matter for hearing on May 19.

"Please advise your officers otherwise they will be in trouble. We have no fun in calling them and giving them a dressing down," the bench told the law officer.