A police officer who during his time of being a recruit, is observed first and foremost for his obedience to ‘call of duty’ and verdict of the court is biased and misleading.
The honourable court should have obtained the officer’s records which could have been easily got since the time he was absorbed into the department, to where he had been officially posted from his service register, until he was inside the school on the fateful day where the shooting occurred. It is pathetic to hear how the officer-in-charge could be not at fault for failing to obey which was his ‘call of duty,’ on the day of the incident?
Last, but not the least the Supreme Court must come forward and take up the case on its own and correct the mistake by setting an example to other schools, parents and other school going children.
Comments
Post a Comment