Case registered in National Human Right Commission
Cuttack/ Kalinga Voice: New Delhi: National Human Rights Commission has accepted a complaint against ASI Joseph Ekka and five others of Chowdwar Police Station and filed a case number 3656/18/2022.Based on this complaint and the following subsequent evidences the case has been registered. National Human Rights Commission is likely to send very soon a direction to the apex body of the Odisha State Police. HimanshuPati of Kakhadi village under Chowdwar Police Station complained that ASI Joseph Ekka and five others entered and searched his house illegally in the night around 8 pm without having any reasonable circumstances of “hot pursuits” and wrongful confinement of any person as per provision of criminal procedure code.
Sources in the National Human Rights Commission, Delhi have revealed that on 29th May, 2022, ASI Joseph Ekkaof Chowdwar Police Station and five other policemen were on patrolling duty in night. During this period they raided the house of HimanshuPati while his wife SubhadraPati was alone in the house. TheChowdwar police team andASI Mr.Ekka and neither had any search warrant, nor any permission from the Magistrate. The police team was not accompanied by any Investigating Police officer. Even not a single witness from the village summoned by the Chowdwarpolice team to tender their personal search before raiding the house. The police ASI Joseph Ekkasaid, Mrs SubhadraPati that their house was being raided to search for a boy and girl from NandankananPolice Station area who were absconding and staying on rent in her house. The police team threatened SubhadraPatiby using obscene gesture and abused in filthy language and demanded five thousand rupees not to involve them in the case.
Himanshu Pati filed a written complaint with the Director General of Police,Odisha. Acting on this the DG Police ordered Cuttack DCP Pinak Mishra to investigate the matter and the then ACP of Zone oneS. N. Muduli was entrusted to enquire in to the complaint. S. N. Muduli in his report had mentioned clearly that while the house was being searched HimanshuPati was not at home and he came only after he was informed by his wife over phone. The report also mentioned that HimanshuPaticooperatedthe police team during the house search, which proves his law abiding nature. The report has categorically mentioned that during the search there was nobodyelse in the house other thanSubhadra and no incriminating evidence was found there. But, this report of S. N. Muduli was astonishingly silent about the violation of the law and the procedures by Chowdwar Police and mis-behaving a woman during raid while they were undertaking night patrolling. By doing this the enquiry policeofficer Mr.Mudulihas in a way favoured the Chowdwar Police ASI and has been biased. Opposing this HimanshuPatihad complained with the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi.
An official of the National Human Rights Commission has said that it is a serious offence and violates the order of the High Court as well as the relevant law including the right to freedom, liberty and dignity. Strong action should be taken against such police officers if the allegation is proved to be right. The protectors of law themselves violated the law as well as the orders of honourable Supreme Court.
Clarifying his actions against the complaint Joseph Ekka has said that a boy and a girl from NandankananPS area had absconded, after we were informed, we conducted the search and raid while on night patrolling. This explanation of ASI Ekka raises a lot of questions. Under which law the patrolling team conducted the search operation during the night? As per the law, the investigating officer of Nandankanan PS should have been present during the search operation to cooperate the local police team. How the search was conducted without the presence of investigating officer of Nandankana PS? Who had ordered to conduct the search and how come without the search warrant by the Magistrate and the presence of at least two witnesses from the village the search was conducted? On what basis and under which law the search was conducted by ASI Joseph Ekka in night? And most importantly there was no station diary in the Chowdwar police station, yet this search was executed after the Sunset while the woman was all alone in her house. Law and procedure has been violated on many front. As per the provisions ASI Ekka was supposed to provide all the documents and information related to the search to HimanshuPati, countersigned by the witnesses present. But this also has not been done. While SubhadraPati was doing the preparations for the most auspicious Hindu“SavitriBrata” ASI Ekka had entered the worship room with his team wearing leather shoes, thus desecrated the holy worship room. By doing so Joseph Ekka has not respected the Hindu religious sentiments ofSubhadraPati, alleged the Supreme Court Lawyer and Senior Human Rights Expert Advocate SaradaPattanaik.
Senior Advocate SaradaPattanaik has said that the officials of Chowdwar Police Station have blatantly violated the Order of High Court, Section 165(a) of Odisha Police Manual and many sections of CrPC by conducting the search in the night and hurting the Hindu religious sentiment ofSubhadraPati by Joseph Ekka. Article 19 and 20(3) of the Constitution of India has given right to a person that the people’s house is not a public property which must be protected from the ingress of the investigating officials. If without any reasonable grounds the investigation officials enter in to the house of a person, it will be amounted to criminal stress pass punishable under section 441 IPC.
The procedure of house search as laid down in CrPC section 166 (1)1 An officer in charge of a police station or a police officer not being below the rank of sub- inspector making an investigation may require an officer in charge of another police station, whether in the same or a different district, to cause a search to be made in any place. Similarly police manual rule prescribes that a police official of and above the rank of sub-inspector with the written order of the OIC/IIC should conduct the house search specifically mentioning the concerned person’s name and place of search. It should be noted here that in a case similar to this, where there was no search warrant and the house was searched in the night, honourable High Court of Odisha had reprimanded Odisha Police and had ordered that the then concerned police officer Madan Mohan Pani to pay a fine of Rs 50,000, Senior Advocate Sharada Pattnayak added.
Opposing the acts of Odisha Police Subhadra Pati also has complained with National Women Commission. SubhadraPati has alleged that while she was doing the preparations for her auspicious Savitri Puja and installing the deity for the Puja on the next day, Joseph Ekka entered the Puja room wearing leather shoes. “Despite repeated requests by me to remove the shoes he did not remove them, rather he ridicules me and my rituals and sarcastically commented.”
