The Supreme Court Judge, Justice SK Kaul orally remarked that the that cooperation with the investigation by the accused did not necessarily mean that the accused person had to say ‘yes; to the said allegations.
The bench of Justice Kaul stated that the Police cannot merely claim that an accused individual was not cooperating during an investigation and emphasized the necessity of providing concrete evidence to support these assertions.
In the present case, the said remark was arising wherein the counsel appearing before the bench comprising of Justice SK Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia argued before the court that the accused had been uncooperative with the ongoing investigation.
The bench of Justice SK Kaul promptly asked the counsel appearing before the court to demonstrate the accused’s lack of cooperation, wherein it highlighted the need for tangible proof. However, when the counsel failed to provide substantial evidence of the accused’s non-cooperation.
Further, the bench of Justice Kaul intervened with the sharp report stating that the Cooperation with investigation cannot mean that you call him and he says yes and the Police cannot just say that the accused is not cooperating, it needs to show how he is he not cooperating.
Justice Kaul while expressing the frustration of him with the trend of police making such assertions without providing evidence for the same.
He stated that in all the cases the police is giving a standard response that the accused isn’t cooperating and you need to show that how is he not cooperating.
The counsel appearing before the court seek for a day or two in order to take instructions in the matter.
The bench gave him to do so.
