Sitting inside Court Hall No. 4 on Monday morning, one could sense a mild tension as Justice Shamim Ahmed began dictating the order. The bench granted an interim stay on the trial against IPS officer Balveer Singh, who faces four cases of alleged custodial torture from his tenure as Assistant Superintendent of Police in Ambasamudram. The courtroom wasn’t packed, but the lawyers present listened carefully; this case has drawn unusual public attention over the past year.
Read also: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Agra Man After Nearly Three Years in Jail, Flags Long Delay in Hearing
Background
Singh’s petition painted a picture of a town simmering with social tensions. According to him, Ambasamudram had long been prone to caste-based conflicts and repeated law-and-order flare-ups. His counsel argued that the officer was constantly handling gang activity and narcotics movement, mainly ganja being funneled in from neighbouring states.
Singh claimed he cracked down on “rowdies and antisocial elements”, which, he said, naturally earned him enemies. He alleged that the very groups affected by his policing retaliated by slapping false torture allegations on him. Some of these complaints, he insisted, multiplied only after the case picked up “media heat” and was shifted to the CB-CID for investigation.
The petition further said that during the high-level inquiry by an IAS officer, several individuals “took advantage of the situation” to file additional, baseless accusations. Singh maintained that the final report filed by investigators was full of contradictions but was still accepted by the trial court without adequate scrutiny.
Read also: Urgent Mentions Only Through Written Slips Except in 'Extraordinary' Cases, CJI Surya Kant Clarifies
Court’s Observations
A key argument raised by Singh’s counsel revolved around a procedural irregularity. They said the trial court framed the charges in Tamil, a language the officer does not understand, and didn’t provide translated witness statements. “The bench observed, ‘The petitioner must be given every fair opportunity to understand the material against him’,” a remark that made the courtroom stir just a little.
The defence stressed that this violated Section 281(4) of the CrPC, which requires ensuring the accused understands the charges. They also questioned why the CB-CID had not followed its own manual-specifically Guideline No. 3 requiring photography or videography of the crime scene-before concluding the investigation.
On the other side, the State, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. R. Ravi, pushed back, arguing that the allegations were serious and the trial court had acted within its authority. But the judge appeared concerned about whether procedural fairness had indeed been met.
Read also: Supreme Court Flags Serious Concerns Over Uttar Pradesh’s MV Act Amendment, Seeks Detailed
Decision
After hearing both sides, Justice Shamim Ahmed granted an interim stay on the trial proceedings. The order pauses the framing of charges and the continuation of the case until further hearing, giving Singh temporary relief while the court examines whether procedural lapses occurred at the lower court stage.
Case Title: Balveer Singh v. The State
Case No.: Crl RC (MD) 1427 of 2025
Case Type: Criminal Revision Case
Decision Date: Notified in 2025
