Commercial Employment in Private Sector.
As per the provisions of AI 2/S/74, retired service officers of the rank of Col and above are required to seek prior permission of the Govt before taking up commercial employment in the private sector within two years of their date of retirement. Army Headquarters letter No. 35072/MS-Retirement dated 19 May 1989 spells out the procedure for securing the prior Govt permission. The retired officers are required to apply in the prescribed proforma (as per Appendix ‘J’) to the MS Branch/MS(X) for officers of the rank of Brig & above and to MS Branch/MS-Retirement for officers of the rank of Col.
Resettlement in Civil Life. Retiring Army Officers may apply for civil employment. However, para 341 of Regulations for the Army 1987 enjoins that an officer who is granted any pension, gratuity or other benefit in respect of his/her Army service or who is likely to receive any pension, gratuity or other benefit, shall obtain the permission of the President before accepting any employment under a Government outside India at any time after his/her Army Service has ceased. An officer of the rank of Colonel or above, whether the rank is held in substantive capacity or otherwise who is granted a pension, gratuity or other benefit, in respect of his/her Army Service or who is likely to receive any pension, gratuity or other benefit shall also obtain such permission prior to accepting employment before the expiry of two years from the date his/her Army Service ceases in the following cases :-
(a) Commercial employment in private undertakings.
(b) Employment in a civil post under the Central or State Government or an Union Territory Administration/Government, or in a post under a Body Corporate owned or controlled by Government if the other officer had been allowed to retire prematurely at his/her own request. Such permission will not, however, be required if the officer had retired from Army Service in the normal course on completion of the standard service prescribed for his/her rank or if he/she had been invalided from Army Service on grounds of ill health or physical disability. Such permission will also not be necessary in cases where due to personal reasons the officers proceeding on normal retirement are allowed to retire a few days earlier (not exceeding one month) than the due date.
Army Placement Agency (APA). To assist retiring Army Officers in seeking avenues for suitable jobs in civil after retirement, the APA has been established in Adjutant General’s Branch/CW Directorate, Integrated HQ of MOD (Army) with Army Placement Nodes (APNs) at major industrial centres. In addition, Army Placement Satellite Nodes (APSNs) have also been opened at most of the Regimental Centres and some Sub Area/Station Headquarters to facilitate registration and placements of the retiring PBOR. This establishment is in addition to the Directorate General Resettlement (DGR) where also, retiring Officers can register their names for employment separately. To register their names with the APA, retirees can obtain application forms and details from the APA/APNs or can log in to its web site www.apa.co.in which is very elaborate and user friendly. Retirees may also approach APA/APNs for any registration related queries or assistance at the following address :- Army Placement Agency AG’s Branch/CW Directorate Integrated HQ of MOD (Army) West Block-III, RK Puram, New Delhi-110066 Telephones : 011 – 26186075, 26186192 Fax : 011 – 26100241 E – mail : apajobs01@yahoo.co.in
Auth : MS(X) Note No. A/46050/Gen/MS(X) dated 07 Jul 04 &
APA Note No. B/44960/Misc/AG/APA dated 17 Aug 05.
Directorate General Resettlement
Resettlement. The primary thrust of the DGR is on dignified resettlement of all ranks retiring from the three services and efforts are made to explore various avenues for employment of ex-servicemen (ESM). With a view to resettle/re-employ ESM, the DGR arranges the following:-
(a) Training. Plan and conduct Resettlement Training programmes to reorient retiring Defence personnel towards civil employment.
(b) Employment. Sponsor registered officers/PBOR for providing employment opportunities in government/semi government/ public sector organizations and assistance in employment with corporate sector.
(c) Self - Employment. Schemes for self-employment and assistance in obtaining loan in farm and non-farm sectors.
Rehabilitation and Welfare. The rehabilitation and welfare schemes as laid down by the Govt from time to time are executed by the Kendriya Sainik Board (KSB) which functions under administrative control of DGR and is co located.
Training Programmes
Training Programmes (Offrs). Training for preparing retiring/retired officers for their resettlement in civil life is one of the major functions entrusted to the DGR. The resettlement training courses provide nationally/internationally accepted certification to facilitate officers to get quick employment within/outside the country. In addition six months courses being conducted at reputed B Schools (IIMs - Ahmedabad, Kolkata, Bangalore, Indore, XLRI Jamshedpur, MDI Gurgaon, NMIMS Mumbai. These courses have received an overwhelming response from officers and resulted in good job placements in the corporate sector. Other courses are being conducted in multifarious fields like Information Technology, Security Services, Entrepreneurship Development, Business Administration, Personnel Management, Hotel Management, Tourism, Human Resources Development, Law, Insurance and many other short term courses on miscellaneous subjects. Constant endeavour is made to improve the quality of training by regular monitoring. The courses are reviewed every year to include courses in new fields based on the participation in current requirements of civil market and corporate world and also to delete obsolete courses. The booklet/CD on courses are distributed down to unit level and can also be obtained free of cost from Training Directorate of DGR or viewed on DGR web site: dgrindia.com.
Eligibility Conditions.
(a) Permanent commissioned officers - last five years of service (last ten years with NOC from service HQ).(b) Retd officers - within 05 years of retirement, subject to age less than 60 yrs.(c) SSC offrs not sought/granted PC, only in last year of service (any time during extn period for army officers).(d) Re-Employed Officers Not Eligible.
Employment
Security Agencies. The DGR registers/sponsors security agencies for providing security guards to various PSUs and industries in the private sector. The scheme offers good self-employment opportunities to retired officers and adequate employment opportunity to ex-PBORs in a field where they have sufficient expertise. The Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) had issued instructions to all PSUs to get security personnel through DGR sponsored Security Agencies. The scheme has shown good results. Through this scheme about 1800 ESM security agencies have been empanelled and approximately over 1,50,000 ESM have gained employment. Fresh forays have been made into the banking sector with active intercession of the Reserve Bank of India and the Finance Ministry. The RBI has issued instructions that the security of the treasury chests of all Banks in the country be entrusted to DGR sponsored ESM Security Agencies only in the absence of the Banks own integral security.
Officer’s Employment. All officers are advised to register with the DGR for Employment/ Self-Employment Assistance in various schemes and for jobs in Govt/ Semi Govt and private sector. The registration is free of cost and offers a great opportunity to retired officers of all ranks, specially middle level officers, to get themselves sponsored for jobs in Govt/Semi Govt and Corporate Business Houses. To spread awareness about potential in ex-defence personnel, seminars are organized periodically in conjunction with ASSOCHAM/FICCI/CII. The registration forms are available on DGR website - dgrindia.com and is also attached as Appendix ‘K’. Registration can be done in the last year of service.
Self-Employment Schemes As it is not feasible to provide Government jobs to all ex-servicemen after their retirement from the Armed Forces, government has formulated several self-employment schemes for encouraging and giving opportunities to ESM entrepreneurs intending to set up their own ventures.
(a) Coal Transportation Scheme. DGR sponsors Ex-Servicemen Coal Transport Companies for the execution of loading and transportation of coal in various coal subsidiaries of Coal India Limited (CIL). The Unemployed retired officers and JCOs registered with DGR, are selected to form ESM Coal Transport Companies and are sponsored to respective coal subsidiaries for five years, extendable by another four years. Presently, nearly 94 such companies are operating under the various coal subsidiaries of CIL. The functioning of these companies is monitored by DGR.
(b) Coal Tipper Scheme. The widows of Defence personnel, who died while in service due to causes attributable to military service, can be sponsored by DGR for attaching one tipper truck in their name with an ESM Coal Transport Company. Eligible widow/disabled soldier is required to make a deposit of Rs. 85,000/- with any of the nominated coal transport company. The company pays them Rs. 3000/- per month for a period of five years, after which the deposited amount of Rs. 85,000/- is paid back to widow/disabled soldier. The functioning of these companies is monitored by DGR.
(c) Allotment of Oil Product Agencies. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas has reserved 8% of the Oil Product Agencies, i.e. LPG Dealership, Petrol Pumps, Kerosene Distributorship etc. for widows and dependants of those who died due to causes attributable to Military Service and disabled soldiers with disability of 20 percent and above attributable to Military Service. Eligible persons can apply as and when such a vacancy under ‘Defence Category’ is advertised in the newspapers. The DGR sponsors eligible candidates by issuing eligibility certificate to them. Interview is conducted by a Dealer Selection Board constituted by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. Final allotment is made by the concerned oil company to the selected candidates.
(d) Management of CNG Stations in National Capital Region (NCR). The scheme for management of CNG stations belonging to Indraprastha Gas Limited was launched as a pilot project in July 2001. The scheme has been extended to retired officers. This scheme is presently available in Delhi only.
(e) Finance (Farm and Non – Farm Sector)
(i)
SEMFEX - II Scheme (From Arms to Farms).
(ii)
SEMFEX - III Scheme (Sena Se Gramodyog).
(iii)
NEF Scheme (Sena Se Laghudyog).
(iv)
Credit Guarantee Fund Scheme.
(v)
Small Road and Water Transport Operators (SRWTO) Scheme.
(vi)
Capital Investment Subsidy Scheme.
(vii)
Scheme for Purchase of Land for Agriculture and Allied Activities.
(viii)
Financial Assistance for Rural Housing.
(ix)
PMRY Scheme for Ex-Servicemen.
(x)
Herbal Farming Scheme for Ex-Servicemen.
Kendriya Sainik Board
Kendriya Sainik Board (KSB) deals with various financial related and personal grievances issues as applicable to the ESM/wards/widows of ESM. The Rajya Sainik Boards and Zila Sainik Boards functioning at state level function under the KSB. It also deals with the allocation of reserved seats for the wards of ESM for admission to professional colleges (MBBS and Engg) and PM Scholarship Scheme.
Assistance and Contact Info
The details of DGR activities are available on DGR website - www.dgrindia.com. The details of training courses and forms etc are also available on the website. DGR publications can be obtained from Publicity Dte of DGR also. Contact Nos. are as given below:-
Training Dte
Emp Dte
Self-Emp Dte
Finance Dte
Publicity Dte
KSB
2619235826192366
26192349
2619235526192357
26192353
26192365
26192360
For further details please contact:-
Director (As Applicable) Concerned Directorate Directorate General Resettlement Ministry of Defence West Block – IV RK Puram New Delhi - 110066
Khadi and Village Industries Commission-KVIC. To assist ex-servicemen, widows and disabled defence personnel in establishing Khadi and Village Industries in rural areas, DGR has formulated a scheme with KVIC. Under the scheme, training and marketing of the product is undertaken by KVIC. The rate of interest for loans taken is 4%.
Apr 26, 2009
Wearing of Uniform by retired officers
(a) All regular officers who have retired from service (including Regular Reserve of officers permitted to retain or granted higher rank on retirement from Regular Reserve of Officers) may wear uniform with badges of appropriate rank on special occasions, such as ceremonial parades, entertainment of military nature and other occasions when wearing of uniform would appear appropriate.
(b) All officers/civilian gentlemen granted honorary commissions (including honorary commission in the Territorial Army and late State Forces), regular officers of the erstwhile State Forces, Junior Commissioned Officers including those granted honorary ranks and other ranks are permitted to wear uniform on all occasions mentioned below: -
(i) Official parties at Rashtrapati Bhawan/Raj Bhawans.
(ii) Invited to official function by Embassy, Delegation or High Commission.
(iii) Army functions including ex-servicemen’s rallies or re-unions.
(iv) Attending durbar or other function in honour of the National Day.
(v) While called upon in aid of civil power.
(vi) While visiting any Military Headquarters on duty.
(vii) While calling on or meeting senior service officers and local heads of the civil administration of and above the rank of Collector/Deputy Commissioner.
(viii) While going to draw pension.
(ix) While serving on the personal staff of a Governor.
(x) When serving on the personal staff of a former ruler (Applies to honorary ex-State Forces Commissioned officers only).
(xi) When attending State or military funerals.
Note : Non-regular officers may wear their full medals or miniatures on civilian dress on occasions specified above.
Types of Dress to be worn. Officers will normally wear the Service Dress of the Regiment/Corps to which they belonged before retirement. Mess Dress may also be worn on appropriate occasion.
Wearing of Badges of Rank. Badges of rank, to be worn by those entitled to use military ranks, will be those of the last substantive rank, except where the higher acting rank has been held for a minimum period of 2 years at the time of retirement or where the use of the honorary/military rank is specifically authorised.
(b) All officers/civilian gentlemen granted honorary commissions (including honorary commission in the Territorial Army and late State Forces), regular officers of the erstwhile State Forces, Junior Commissioned Officers including those granted honorary ranks and other ranks are permitted to wear uniform on all occasions mentioned below: -
(i) Official parties at Rashtrapati Bhawan/Raj Bhawans.
(ii) Invited to official function by Embassy, Delegation or High Commission.
(iii) Army functions including ex-servicemen’s rallies or re-unions.
(iv) Attending durbar or other function in honour of the National Day.
(v) While called upon in aid of civil power.
(vi) While visiting any Military Headquarters on duty.
(vii) While calling on or meeting senior service officers and local heads of the civil administration of and above the rank of Collector/Deputy Commissioner.
(viii) While going to draw pension.
(ix) While serving on the personal staff of a Governor.
(x) When serving on the personal staff of a former ruler (Applies to honorary ex-State Forces Commissioned officers only).
(xi) When attending State or military funerals.
Note : Non-regular officers may wear their full medals or miniatures on civilian dress on occasions specified above.
Types of Dress to be worn. Officers will normally wear the Service Dress of the Regiment/Corps to which they belonged before retirement. Mess Dress may also be worn on appropriate occasion.
Wearing of Badges of Rank. Badges of rank, to be worn by those entitled to use military ranks, will be those of the last substantive rank, except where the higher acting rank has been held for a minimum period of 2 years at the time of retirement or where the use of the honorary/military rank is specifically authorised.
Apr 15, 2009
Sunday Pioneer
Soldiers must vote for rights : Ashok K Mehta
National security, which is rarely discussed in Parliament, has been trivialised at the hustings too
“You sent a Minister with terrorists to Kandahar while we sent commandos to Mumbai.” The debate is in the past tense and in negative.Traditionally defence issues have arisen following military and operational mishaps and not as part of any institutionalised defence and security strategy formulation. Barring the 1971 military success over Pakistan which eventually became a case of battlefield victory turning into political defeat, the record is one of self-inflicted lapses. The premature acceptance in 1948 of a ceasefire in Jammu & Kashmir, the Himalayan blunder of 1962 exacerbated by the no-use of IAF, the strategic folly of returning Haji Pir Pass and Point 13620 in Kargil to Pakistan in 1965, the mindless storming of the Golden Temple in 1984 and even the ill-managed expeditionary force to Sri Lanka in 1987 will all figure in the hall of foul-ups. Nineteen eighty-eight served as a turning point for externally-sponsored low intensity conflict becoming a proxy war. Nuclear tests on the sub-continent a decade later virtually sanitised the proxy war, encouraging Kandahar, Kargil and culminating in Parakram and Mumbai. No war has been fought since 1971 though border skirmishes and terror-related crises have become routine since the late-1980s. India, which has a high grade world’s fourth largest military, is unable to stop cross-border terrorism. The British left us with sound political institutions and systems of governance. But strategic culture and military thought were not among them. For 50 of the 60 years after independence it was during Congress rule, unencumbered by coalition imperatives, that strategic mistakes were made. Ingrained in its leadership and psyche is a strong defensive and passive mentality that infected the military and locked it in an intellectual straitjacket. The economic reforms of the 1990s brought down the defence budget to below two per cent of GDP, emaciating defence preparedness. By the time of Kargil, Army Chief Gen VP Malik had to say: “We will fight with what we have.” The BJP’s performance was a shade better given it arrived with the nuclear bang. Fortunately the after-Kargil report led to a hundred recommendations on defence reform though regrettably, few could be implemented — especially the appointment of Chief of Defence Staff. Although the BJP had a robust defence programme, ‘India Shining’ robbed it of another term to institutionalise them.The worst hit is internal security. Maoists struck thrice in the last week killing 30 security personnel. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh periodically describes Maoists as the single biggest internal threat facing the country. The insurgency in Assam should have been quelled a decade ago once Operation Rhino and Operation Bajrang were launched in the early-1990s, but recent political meddling has undone the gains from Operation All Clear in Bhutan in 2003 that had rooting out ULFA as its objective. Widespread infiltration from Bangladesh, the Congress’s historical vote-bank, has created a grave security threat. This month’s bombing campaign in Assam is ULFA’s signal that it is fit, alive and kicking. The unabated and unresponded spell of terrorist attacks mapping the country and culminating in Mumbai in the last four years has amazed security experts. The Government’s usual reaction has been: “Sorry. But we’re not soft on terror and will give a fitting reply.” The oldest victim of terror has had no counter-terrorism strategy to protect the people of this country. Mumbai and elections have finally forced the Congress to produce its counter-terror document which is Mission Number One and Pledge to Zero Tolerance to Terror. The accent is defensive and reactive, not punitive or preemptive. The BJP is saying it will send troops to Pakistan to stop terrorism. Only a comprehensive Homeland Security model can remove the deficiencies of internal insecurity.National security strategy and defence and perspective plans gather dust since 2007. For the third time, the defence budget has dipped below two per cent of the GDP and Rs 17,000 crore on modernisation has returned to the Treasury over five years which has affected defence preparedness. The IAF has slumped from 39 to 32 squadrons, naval ship strength has declined by a third and the Army is deficient in aviation, artillery and counter-terrorism equipment. The military has lost its conventional edge over Pakistan, worst of all, in Jammu & Kashmir, the theatre of decision. The Sixth Pay Commission was a good opportunity to raise the morale and image of the services, given the shortages in the officer corps. Civilian-bureaucratic stranglehold over adjudicating the status and salary of the fighting forces has led to massive resentment in the ranks. By the Service Chiefs blinking first after a maze of duplicitous committees to redress the anomalies, soldiers have lost to civilian and para-military counterparts — Lt Generals in higher administrative grade, Lt Colonels in pay and grade bands and sepoys in enhanced service weightage for pension. The Government has reasserted civilian bureaucratic control over the armed forces.The one rank one pension issue has demonstrated through the ex-servicemen’s movement that the most obedient and disciplined force can also lose its cool. The Sixth Pay Commission has created four classes within a class: Pre-1966, post-1966 to December 2005, post-January 2006 to September 2008, and post- October 2008. Further, Major Generals are in court as their pension is less than Brigadiers, altogether leading to confusion worst confounded.The ex-servicemen are likely to vote BJP, which has promised not only one rank, one pay but also income tax exempt pay for servicemen. Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, who gave India under a Congress Government its first military victory in 1,000 years, was not conferred a Bharat Ratna. A country that does not care for the izzat and iqbal (respect and welfare) of the armed forces is harming their apolitical, secular and disciplined disposition.In the military mind and public perception the BJP stands for making India militarily strong though the bigger challenge for a future Government is political will to employ usable military forces to deter and punish cross-border terrorism. National security, especially internal security must be depoliticised and governed by a national political consensus. Defence planning and strategic security culture must be taught to those who represent the people in Parliament. As the political class of India and the people remember its soldiers only during Kargil, Mumbai and tsunami, soldiers and ex-servicemen must vote for their rights
Soldiers must vote for rights : Ashok K Mehta
National security, which is rarely discussed in Parliament, has been trivialised at the hustings too
“You sent a Minister with terrorists to Kandahar while we sent commandos to Mumbai.” The debate is in the past tense and in negative.Traditionally defence issues have arisen following military and operational mishaps and not as part of any institutionalised defence and security strategy formulation. Barring the 1971 military success over Pakistan which eventually became a case of battlefield victory turning into political defeat, the record is one of self-inflicted lapses. The premature acceptance in 1948 of a ceasefire in Jammu & Kashmir, the Himalayan blunder of 1962 exacerbated by the no-use of IAF, the strategic folly of returning Haji Pir Pass and Point 13620 in Kargil to Pakistan in 1965, the mindless storming of the Golden Temple in 1984 and even the ill-managed expeditionary force to Sri Lanka in 1987 will all figure in the hall of foul-ups. Nineteen eighty-eight served as a turning point for externally-sponsored low intensity conflict becoming a proxy war. Nuclear tests on the sub-continent a decade later virtually sanitised the proxy war, encouraging Kandahar, Kargil and culminating in Parakram and Mumbai. No war has been fought since 1971 though border skirmishes and terror-related crises have become routine since the late-1980s. India, which has a high grade world’s fourth largest military, is unable to stop cross-border terrorism. The British left us with sound political institutions and systems of governance. But strategic culture and military thought were not among them. For 50 of the 60 years after independence it was during Congress rule, unencumbered by coalition imperatives, that strategic mistakes were made. Ingrained in its leadership and psyche is a strong defensive and passive mentality that infected the military and locked it in an intellectual straitjacket. The economic reforms of the 1990s brought down the defence budget to below two per cent of GDP, emaciating defence preparedness. By the time of Kargil, Army Chief Gen VP Malik had to say: “We will fight with what we have.” The BJP’s performance was a shade better given it arrived with the nuclear bang. Fortunately the after-Kargil report led to a hundred recommendations on defence reform though regrettably, few could be implemented — especially the appointment of Chief of Defence Staff. Although the BJP had a robust defence programme, ‘India Shining’ robbed it of another term to institutionalise them.The worst hit is internal security. Maoists struck thrice in the last week killing 30 security personnel. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh periodically describes Maoists as the single biggest internal threat facing the country. The insurgency in Assam should have been quelled a decade ago once Operation Rhino and Operation Bajrang were launched in the early-1990s, but recent political meddling has undone the gains from Operation All Clear in Bhutan in 2003 that had rooting out ULFA as its objective. Widespread infiltration from Bangladesh, the Congress’s historical vote-bank, has created a grave security threat. This month’s bombing campaign in Assam is ULFA’s signal that it is fit, alive and kicking. The unabated and unresponded spell of terrorist attacks mapping the country and culminating in Mumbai in the last four years has amazed security experts. The Government’s usual reaction has been: “Sorry. But we’re not soft on terror and will give a fitting reply.” The oldest victim of terror has had no counter-terrorism strategy to protect the people of this country. Mumbai and elections have finally forced the Congress to produce its counter-terror document which is Mission Number One and Pledge to Zero Tolerance to Terror. The accent is defensive and reactive, not punitive or preemptive. The BJP is saying it will send troops to Pakistan to stop terrorism. Only a comprehensive Homeland Security model can remove the deficiencies of internal insecurity.National security strategy and defence and perspective plans gather dust since 2007. For the third time, the defence budget has dipped below two per cent of the GDP and Rs 17,000 crore on modernisation has returned to the Treasury over five years which has affected defence preparedness. The IAF has slumped from 39 to 32 squadrons, naval ship strength has declined by a third and the Army is deficient in aviation, artillery and counter-terrorism equipment. The military has lost its conventional edge over Pakistan, worst of all, in Jammu & Kashmir, the theatre of decision. The Sixth Pay Commission was a good opportunity to raise the morale and image of the services, given the shortages in the officer corps. Civilian-bureaucratic stranglehold over adjudicating the status and salary of the fighting forces has led to massive resentment in the ranks. By the Service Chiefs blinking first after a maze of duplicitous committees to redress the anomalies, soldiers have lost to civilian and para-military counterparts — Lt Generals in higher administrative grade, Lt Colonels in pay and grade bands and sepoys in enhanced service weightage for pension. The Government has reasserted civilian bureaucratic control over the armed forces.The one rank one pension issue has demonstrated through the ex-servicemen’s movement that the most obedient and disciplined force can also lose its cool. The Sixth Pay Commission has created four classes within a class: Pre-1966, post-1966 to December 2005, post-January 2006 to September 2008, and post- October 2008. Further, Major Generals are in court as their pension is less than Brigadiers, altogether leading to confusion worst confounded.The ex-servicemen are likely to vote BJP, which has promised not only one rank, one pay but also income tax exempt pay for servicemen. Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, who gave India under a Congress Government its first military victory in 1,000 years, was not conferred a Bharat Ratna. A country that does not care for the izzat and iqbal (respect and welfare) of the armed forces is harming their apolitical, secular and disciplined disposition.In the military mind and public perception the BJP stands for making India militarily strong though the bigger challenge for a future Government is political will to employ usable military forces to deter and punish cross-border terrorism. National security, especially internal security must be depoliticised and governed by a national political consensus. Defence planning and strategic security culture must be taught to those who represent the people in Parliament. As the political class of India and the people remember its soldiers only during Kargil, Mumbai and tsunami, soldiers and ex-servicemen must vote for their rights
Apr 6, 2009
Pay Commission Anomalies: Good read
Anomalies in Service officers Pay as compared to Civilian OfficersIn the recent months, there had been considerable anger among serving and retired Service Officers as 6th Pay Commission had downgraded the status and pay of Service Officers compared to civilian and IAS/IPS officers. You will be surprised to know that this down grade started in 4th Pay Commission with active participation by our own pay commission cells.Due to their wrong understanding and actions, a distorted version of running pay scales were adopted. This concept was wrongly implemented under the active support of our pay commission cell. The effects of wrong understanding and lack of discussions in open forums affecting the career of many officers had now resulted in measures that down graded our status and pay. Bee Cee, a retired Naval Officer who was associated with Pay Commissions(4 and 5) had written an article how these adverse measures were implemented due to our own failures and lack of understanding.This clip provides the contents of this article.S.Murugan
clipped from www.indianmilitary.infoNot so pragmatic : God save us from ourselves! I stumbled upon your blogsite by chance while passing time post- retirement. It was interesting to see Pay Commissions, Higher Defence Organisation, Status, Top Brass, Oliver Twist, Gen. John Hackett, Colonialism and Indian values, Rand Corpn’s report on the Indian Armed Forces, Civil Military relations, old friend Prakash setting the cat among the pigeons and best of all, Riding a dead horse and of course Mahajan’s quotes. While it is heartening to see that the spirit of discussion remains alive, but the content, especially Gen Surjit Singh’s lament on the CPCs, reminded me of some lines from Roy Campbell, not the musician, but a South African poet of yore.
“You praise the firm restraint with which they writeI am with you there of courseThey use the snaffle and the curb all rightBut where’s the bloody horse”.
Most of these are subjects that one has dealt with, whilst in service, either as part of the job or out of personal interest. While I was quite content to watch from the sidelines what goes on, prodding from some friends who are aware of my views have persuaded me that clearing the air on some facts may minimize this ‘comedy of errors’ that happens every time there is an opportunity for correction.
While I agree that there is little love lost between the bureaucracy and the uniformed personnel, I have no doubt that most of our problems with respect to pay and status are more self-inflicted than otherwise. In that, my views may be closer to yours than that of other bloggers. We can address other issues later.
Institutionally, I think there is some trepidation about subordinates (officers and men) being well-paid. Maybe fears of losing control, indiscipline etc. I don’t see any other reason for the persistent disconnect between public posturing and actual proposals. Incidentally, the Calvin & Hobbes ‘we don’t want to learn anything from this’ was the centre-piece of a presentation by a civilian professor at a Defence College abroad I attended many years ago. That really puts our Pay commission conundrum in perspective. But I am surprised there were not many responses to it.
III CPC. This was remarkable in the sense that they gave the best comparison between the nature of duties of the armed forces and civil services. Pay-wise I don’t think they significantly changed the status quo ante.
IV CPC. The single biggest lowering of the pay and status of Service officers was done at the IV CPC, ironically, at the request of the Services. Without going into lengthy details and figures to buttress the argument, I’ll just say what transpired. Though it is from memory, I won’t be far off the mark.
The pay cells asked for 2Lt to Maj. Gen to be bracketed in the same pay band to ameliorate poor promotion prospects. Why it was called running scale is a mystery to me because it kept Service officers standing whilst others moved ahead by Assured Career Progression (ACP) up to Selection Grade (NFSG). Don’t ask me why it is called selection grade when it is a grade of pay given to the guy who is not selected for promotion. The ACP was available to armed forces also in the pay of Major ( Selection Grade),given to the Major who was not selected for promotion to Lt Col. This I think was an achievement of the Q&M paper of 1982 and few seem to recollect this. The CPC report recommended that the pay of Maj (SG) be done away with in view of the running scale (as requested by Services).
If we had not put up any proposal to the IV CPC, by their own logic, the CPC would have given the Major the same scale as the Director(NFSG) in the 14th year as was done for all the other organized Gp A services with which Service officers are bracketed. But since we insisted on being different, and wanted a rank pay in place of the normal increment on promotion, they succumbed to the demand, merged the civil scales up to NFSG, split it into (pay on running scale plus rank pay) and gave the armed forces the same ACP as available to civilians, but in the form that the services asked for. If you check the figures you’ll find that the Major’s pay, incl rank pay was co-terminus (a term I learned from our pay experts) with the civil NFSG scale. But the running (must have been on a tread-mill) scale slowed progress and rank pay (rankles every time) created an ambiguity on the basic pay for status equations. In other words, the Major who was to be placed in the NFSG scale in the 14th year moved to the minimum (Rank pay is also included in this minimum) of that scale in the 16th 0r 17th year only.
As if this wasn’t enough, Lt Col, Col, Brig and Major General were also sought to be put in the same bracket. The CPC probably had more respect for the Maj. Gen and declined to bring him down, but agreed for Lt Col, Col and Brig who were brought down by 1, 2 and 3 scales respectively and given Rank Pay as consolation.
Instead of seeking to remedy of the situation when the report came out, the Services pay cells appear to have gone on a propaganda blitz, telling everybody that Majors, Lt Cols and Cols were given the pay of Brigs, less rank pay. The only hint of truth in the statement was that the rank pay was an insignificant amount probably less than the amount you would have got if you moved into the next pay scale like civilian counterparts.
The pay-cells managed to sell this idea so well and with fanfare that nobody bothered to check its veracity. Had they done so, it would have been obvious that Brigs, Cols and Lt Cols were actually down-graded to the level of Majors and not the other way around. The equations got further skewed with the SAG II (corresponding to the Brig) of civilians getting ‘upwardly merged’ (The babus come up with interesting terminology if nothing else) with SAG I (Maj Gen/ JS scale).
The relatively lesser damage during fixation of pay was later taken up by Maj. Dhanapalan. While Dhanapalan is right, look at the figures and you can see that the reduction of rank pay was done to keep the scale plus rank pay within the civil ACP.
In fairness to those who steered the case before the IV CPC, there could be some justifications for the situation at the time because the norms for central pay determination were not clearly spelt out. The IV CPC laid down some norms and we should have realized immediately that the running pay scale was a flawed concept and remedied it immediately. Instead we chose to call this disaster, an achievement, and have been repeating it again and again ad nauseum. Institutionally if we cannot see the obvious even after 22 years, it calls for a review of the way Services handle such issues.
V CPC. The V CPC was an opportunity for correction. But we asked for more of the same and literally asked for a reduction in pay vis-à-vis the civil services. I am not being sarcastic, read the Services memorandum to the V CPC. Fortunately for the Services, even the CPC was probably overwhelmed by the sheer size of the memorandum and didn’t bother to read it. Ironically, the graphical representation of the state of affairs in the volume itself showed that the IV CPC was a disaster for the Services, but we asked for more of the same. But by then there was some realization, outside of the pay-cells at Service HQs, that the running pay-scale/ rank pay had done great damage. The main thrust of the Services’ demand to the Anomalies committee post V CPC (Yes, a similar outpouring of indignation was there after V CPC) was to restore the pre-IV CPC pay equations and re-merge rank pay to basic pay. It was of course turned down, mainly on the argument that it was created at the request of the Services.
VI CPC. I have not seen the Services proposal to the VI CPC and don’t want to comment on it, but I suspect someone at the CPC had time to read the Services’ proposals to the V CPC, because most of this lowering of pay and status all are shouting about now, seem to be what we ourselves asked for at the V CPC. I may be wrong, but it seems to me whoever was tasked to look at the Services proposals at the V CPC may have done it at the VI CPC as well and had the time to read the tome we prepared in 1995. This can be easily checked with our pay guys. It may also explain the CPC’s surprise at the reaction from the Services.
I think it was Carl Jung who spoke about every individual having a death-wish. Probably organizations too have it and Indian armed forces reiterate this at every pay commission and every time some old foggies sing paeans about the achievements at the IV CPC. Not only at CPCs, the AVS report formally lowered the Lt Col to NFSG level and our recommended solution for shortcomings in Higher Defence Organisation is to elevate the Defence Secretary from the level of the Vice-Chief to above the CDS. We can expect much hand-wringing and wailing if and when it gets implemented, including from those who signed the report recommending it.
Though I am a bit away from the scene of action, I can lay a safe bet that if we add up our proposals to the IV and V CPCs, and link it with the AVS report; we would generally get what the VI CPC has recommended. Now that the IAS can move to the Maj Gen’s scale in the 14th year, another request of the Services pay cells to the IV CPC, i.e. of bracketing the Major General with the then civilian equivalent of the Major has also been granted.
God save us from ourselves!Bee Ceehttp://pragmatic.nationalinterest.in/2008/05/10/guest-post-not-so-pragmatic/
Posted by Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh at 10:45
clipped from www.indianmilitary.infoNot so pragmatic : God save us from ourselves! I stumbled upon your blogsite by chance while passing time post- retirement. It was interesting to see Pay Commissions, Higher Defence Organisation, Status, Top Brass, Oliver Twist, Gen. John Hackett, Colonialism and Indian values, Rand Corpn’s report on the Indian Armed Forces, Civil Military relations, old friend Prakash setting the cat among the pigeons and best of all, Riding a dead horse and of course Mahajan’s quotes. While it is heartening to see that the spirit of discussion remains alive, but the content, especially Gen Surjit Singh’s lament on the CPCs, reminded me of some lines from Roy Campbell, not the musician, but a South African poet of yore.
“You praise the firm restraint with which they writeI am with you there of courseThey use the snaffle and the curb all rightBut where’s the bloody horse”.
Most of these are subjects that one has dealt with, whilst in service, either as part of the job or out of personal interest. While I was quite content to watch from the sidelines what goes on, prodding from some friends who are aware of my views have persuaded me that clearing the air on some facts may minimize this ‘comedy of errors’ that happens every time there is an opportunity for correction.
While I agree that there is little love lost between the bureaucracy and the uniformed personnel, I have no doubt that most of our problems with respect to pay and status are more self-inflicted than otherwise. In that, my views may be closer to yours than that of other bloggers. We can address other issues later.
Institutionally, I think there is some trepidation about subordinates (officers and men) being well-paid. Maybe fears of losing control, indiscipline etc. I don’t see any other reason for the persistent disconnect between public posturing and actual proposals. Incidentally, the Calvin & Hobbes ‘we don’t want to learn anything from this’ was the centre-piece of a presentation by a civilian professor at a Defence College abroad I attended many years ago. That really puts our Pay commission conundrum in perspective. But I am surprised there were not many responses to it.
III CPC. This was remarkable in the sense that they gave the best comparison between the nature of duties of the armed forces and civil services. Pay-wise I don’t think they significantly changed the status quo ante.
IV CPC. The single biggest lowering of the pay and status of Service officers was done at the IV CPC, ironically, at the request of the Services. Without going into lengthy details and figures to buttress the argument, I’ll just say what transpired. Though it is from memory, I won’t be far off the mark.
The pay cells asked for 2Lt to Maj. Gen to be bracketed in the same pay band to ameliorate poor promotion prospects. Why it was called running scale is a mystery to me because it kept Service officers standing whilst others moved ahead by Assured Career Progression (ACP) up to Selection Grade (NFSG). Don’t ask me why it is called selection grade when it is a grade of pay given to the guy who is not selected for promotion. The ACP was available to armed forces also in the pay of Major ( Selection Grade),given to the Major who was not selected for promotion to Lt Col. This I think was an achievement of the Q&M paper of 1982 and few seem to recollect this. The CPC report recommended that the pay of Maj (SG) be done away with in view of the running scale (as requested by Services).
If we had not put up any proposal to the IV CPC, by their own logic, the CPC would have given the Major the same scale as the Director(NFSG) in the 14th year as was done for all the other organized Gp A services with which Service officers are bracketed. But since we insisted on being different, and wanted a rank pay in place of the normal increment on promotion, they succumbed to the demand, merged the civil scales up to NFSG, split it into (pay on running scale plus rank pay) and gave the armed forces the same ACP as available to civilians, but in the form that the services asked for. If you check the figures you’ll find that the Major’s pay, incl rank pay was co-terminus (a term I learned from our pay experts) with the civil NFSG scale. But the running (must have been on a tread-mill) scale slowed progress and rank pay (rankles every time) created an ambiguity on the basic pay for status equations. In other words, the Major who was to be placed in the NFSG scale in the 14th year moved to the minimum (Rank pay is also included in this minimum) of that scale in the 16th 0r 17th year only.
As if this wasn’t enough, Lt Col, Col, Brig and Major General were also sought to be put in the same bracket. The CPC probably had more respect for the Maj. Gen and declined to bring him down, but agreed for Lt Col, Col and Brig who were brought down by 1, 2 and 3 scales respectively and given Rank Pay as consolation.
Instead of seeking to remedy of the situation when the report came out, the Services pay cells appear to have gone on a propaganda blitz, telling everybody that Majors, Lt Cols and Cols were given the pay of Brigs, less rank pay. The only hint of truth in the statement was that the rank pay was an insignificant amount probably less than the amount you would have got if you moved into the next pay scale like civilian counterparts.
The pay-cells managed to sell this idea so well and with fanfare that nobody bothered to check its veracity. Had they done so, it would have been obvious that Brigs, Cols and Lt Cols were actually down-graded to the level of Majors and not the other way around. The equations got further skewed with the SAG II (corresponding to the Brig) of civilians getting ‘upwardly merged’ (The babus come up with interesting terminology if nothing else) with SAG I (Maj Gen/ JS scale).
The relatively lesser damage during fixation of pay was later taken up by Maj. Dhanapalan. While Dhanapalan is right, look at the figures and you can see that the reduction of rank pay was done to keep the scale plus rank pay within the civil ACP.
In fairness to those who steered the case before the IV CPC, there could be some justifications for the situation at the time because the norms for central pay determination were not clearly spelt out. The IV CPC laid down some norms and we should have realized immediately that the running pay scale was a flawed concept and remedied it immediately. Instead we chose to call this disaster, an achievement, and have been repeating it again and again ad nauseum. Institutionally if we cannot see the obvious even after 22 years, it calls for a review of the way Services handle such issues.
V CPC. The V CPC was an opportunity for correction. But we asked for more of the same and literally asked for a reduction in pay vis-à-vis the civil services. I am not being sarcastic, read the Services memorandum to the V CPC. Fortunately for the Services, even the CPC was probably overwhelmed by the sheer size of the memorandum and didn’t bother to read it. Ironically, the graphical representation of the state of affairs in the volume itself showed that the IV CPC was a disaster for the Services, but we asked for more of the same. But by then there was some realization, outside of the pay-cells at Service HQs, that the running pay-scale/ rank pay had done great damage. The main thrust of the Services’ demand to the Anomalies committee post V CPC (Yes, a similar outpouring of indignation was there after V CPC) was to restore the pre-IV CPC pay equations and re-merge rank pay to basic pay. It was of course turned down, mainly on the argument that it was created at the request of the Services.
VI CPC. I have not seen the Services proposal to the VI CPC and don’t want to comment on it, but I suspect someone at the CPC had time to read the Services’ proposals to the V CPC, because most of this lowering of pay and status all are shouting about now, seem to be what we ourselves asked for at the V CPC. I may be wrong, but it seems to me whoever was tasked to look at the Services proposals at the V CPC may have done it at the VI CPC as well and had the time to read the tome we prepared in 1995. This can be easily checked with our pay guys. It may also explain the CPC’s surprise at the reaction from the Services.
I think it was Carl Jung who spoke about every individual having a death-wish. Probably organizations too have it and Indian armed forces reiterate this at every pay commission and every time some old foggies sing paeans about the achievements at the IV CPC. Not only at CPCs, the AVS report formally lowered the Lt Col to NFSG level and our recommended solution for shortcomings in Higher Defence Organisation is to elevate the Defence Secretary from the level of the Vice-Chief to above the CDS. We can expect much hand-wringing and wailing if and when it gets implemented, including from those who signed the report recommending it.
Though I am a bit away from the scene of action, I can lay a safe bet that if we add up our proposals to the IV and V CPCs, and link it with the AVS report; we would generally get what the VI CPC has recommended. Now that the IAS can move to the Maj Gen’s scale in the 14th year, another request of the Services pay cells to the IV CPC, i.e. of bracketing the Major General with the then civilian equivalent of the Major has also been granted.
God save us from ourselves!Bee Ceehttp://pragmatic.nationalinterest.in/2008/05/10/guest-post-not-so-pragmatic/
Posted by Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh at 10:45
Apr 1, 2009
INDIAN CITIZENs’ / PEOPLEs’ POCKET DIARY TO POLICE LAWS
INDIAN CITIZENs’ / PEOPLEs’ POCKET DIARY TO POLICE LAWS
Preface: Everyone cherish freedom, be it leftist or rightist, human being or animal being, Prime minister of India or a footpath dweller of Mumbai. The right of personal liberty of every individual is one of the most cherished fundamental right in our Constitution of India.
The post Independence era OF INDIA shows that most of the laws inherited from British Rule that had colonial exploitation as their basis, were left untouched. The present Police Laws indeed so inherited is largely left intact. The modern legal system provides that as soon as an offence is committed the Criminal Law is set into motion, irrespective of the wishes of the injured party.
Although The Police force in India is known for all the wrong reasons- inefficiency, high handedness, brutality, corruption and being politicized, yet, it must also be stated that mere ruthless criticism will not improve Police efficiency for they function with a lot of constraints cannot be lose sight of.
We love to break traffic signals if there are NO watchdogs. We all so afraid of Police, ever thought why? Our watchdogs, our Justice System to check Police is simply absent.
One thing that terrorizes the most to a common man is fear of highhandedness of police who has presumably unbridled power to detain any person though maliciously.
The trauma and agony of an accused Undertrial prisoner and of his family members is beyond to be described and no amount of money compensation can bring back the valuable years of the innocent accused. The damage inflicted by unlawful detention is massive and ruthless. It bleeds the soul of the victim and may occasion the loss of livelihood of a family resulting in trap of ugly poverty.
Last and not the least. The accused is innocent till proven guilty. That ten guilty Man may escape but even one innocent should not be punished. This is the foundation on which the entire criminal Jurisprudence is built upon. That been so, how an innocent accused can be justified in captivity even for a day.
This small literature is aimed at informing Common man about various safeguards provided in law and so as to prevent police acting fanciful.
Citizenry Ignorance is the chief cause of Police causing excesses to them.
Illegal Detentions: A person so arrested / detained illegally even for one hour can file a Complaint against the person for making false Complaint (FIR), including the Police Officer causing illegal arrest/detention.
False Complaints: Where a false complaint been registered against any person, he may register an FIR against that person u/s 182 and 211 of IPC for making false complaint.
IPC Section 182. False information, with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person. IPC Section 211. False charge of offence made with intent to injure.
FIR: After a Complaint of an Offence is given, it should be immediately registered and it is the right of the Complainant to receive a Copy of the First Information Report (FIR) or NC (Non Cognizable Offence), as the nature of the complaint suggests. If Police refuses to register Complaint, the same can be sent by Post/ Telegram, to that Police Station or to Superintendent of Police of the district or Commissioner of Police as in Metropolitan cities.
In case of Non Cognizable Offences, after registering the same, since Police do not investigate the case, Complainant must be advised to approach the Magistrate court for further action. The address of Magistrate Court may be obtained from the Police Station itself.
Police cannot evade registering an offence on the plea that they do not have Jurisdiction. It is necessary that Offence is registered and the same is sent to the Police Station concerned.
If Police refuses to register complaint, than a Complaint may be made to Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate. There are series of HC and SC judgments wherein they have warned Police that they must register Complaint whoever comes to them.
Very Important: Also, wherever need so arises, relevant section of Indian Penal Code and / or Bombay High Court and Supreme Court Judgments, as stated hereinafter, must be brought before the Police, either verbally or by incorporating the same in written Complaint.
WHO CAN LODGE AN F.I.R.?
(1) Complainant who is an aggrieved person or some body on his behalf.
(2) By any person who is aware of the offence OR who is a witness to any offence.
(3) Provided the person in possession of the hearsay is required to subscribe his signature to it and mention the source of his information so that it does not amount to irresponsible rumors. The rule of law is, if general law is broken any person has a right to complain whether he has suffered an injury or not.
(4) By the accused himself.
(5) By the SHO(Station House Officer) on his own knowledge or information even when a cognizable offence is committed in view of a officer incharge he can register a case himself and is not bound to take down in writing any information. Under the order of Magistrate u/s 156 (3) Criminal Procedure code, when a complaint is forwarded to officer incharge without taking cognizance. If information is only hear say, then SHO should register case only if person in possession of hearsay subscribes his signature to it and mentions the source of his information so that it does not amount to irresponsible rumors. The information must be definite, not vague, authentic, not baseless, gossip or rumors, clearly making out a cognizable case.
WHAT ACTION CAN BE EXPECTED FROM THE POLICE IN NON-COGNIZABLE OFFENCE ?
1. The information regarding non-cognizable offence ought to get lodged in the Daily Diary Register.
2. Complainant ought to get advised & briefed properly to approach the Court.
3. Police officer can not investigate into the Non-cognizable cases without the order of the court hence complainant should be informed.
5. If an order regarding investigation into non-cognizable cases is received, the same procedure should be adopted as in the cognizable cases.
6. Orders of the court should be obtained to arrest the accused in Non cognizable cases after the investigation.
7. If one of the offences in the commission of crime is cognizable office then Non-cognizable offence should also be investigated in the same manner( as Cognizable offences are investigated.
WHAT DOES THE POLICE DO WHEN THE COMPLAINTS ARE DOUBTFUL ?
If the information or other intelligent relating to the alleged commission of a cognizable offence is such that an officer-in-charge of the police station has reason to suspect that the alleged offence has not been committed, he shall record the same in the station diary along with his reasons for not investigating the crime and also nullify the informer.
Inspector or Supervising Officer can direct the investigation in such case and may send the report to the District Magistrate for perusal and order.
Finger Tips:
FIR should be lodged immediately. The longer the delay, the stronger the suspicion. The delay should satisfactorily be explained. Delay, if any, in registering the case should be recorded in FIR.
Written complaint should be taken. But complainant should be specific while giving written statement.
Written statement should be duly signed or put thumb impression.
Only a report of cognizable offence should be lodged in FIR.
Place, Date & Time of occurrence should be mentioned in the FIR.
Arrival & Departure of the informer should be mentioned in the FIR as well as Daily Dairy Register.
Four copies of FIR should be prepared simultaneously by carbon paper process.
FIR should be lodged in neat & clean hand writing and be kept in safe custody being a permanent record.
A copy of FIR should be sent to Magistrate concerned immediately.
A copy of FIR should be provided to the complainant free of cost.
Care should be taken that all the material facts are mentioned in FIR as known to the complainant.
If information is available at the time, Names of the accused persons should occur in F.I.R., if not, FIR can be registered in unknown accused person.
An FIR once registered can only be quashed (cancelled) by High Court concerned.
Police Incorrectly framing FIR: When the victim or anybody on his behalf approaches the Police station to register/ file complaint, whether in the nature of Cognizable offence ( FIR) or Non Cognizable (N.C.) offence, it is the responsibility of police to correctly take down the complaint and thus register FIR or NC as the nature of offence so emerge from the complaint. Also, if the Complaint comprises both Cognizable and non Cognizable offences, then the offence should be treated as Cognizable Offence and thus FIR should be registered. Yet, if Police manipulate with registering FIR to NC or the other way round, then they may be charged with offence u/s 218 of IPC.
A copy of Every FIR or NC so registered by Police must be sent to respective Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate within 24 hours so that it cannot be tempered with.
Offence under IPC Section 218. Public servant framing incorrect record or writing with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture.
Filing Complaint with Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate: Where Police refuses to register Complaint, than a Complaint may be made to Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate of that area where the incident has took place, directing Police to register FIR and carry out investigation and submit report.
Also, a Person instead of going to Police, may directly approach Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate to file an Complaint u/s 190 of CrPC and thus the Magistrate on the merits of the case may direct the Police to register FIR/NC and investigate the case.
Very Important: High Court Criminal Manual Appellate Side- Chapter 3, Section 1A(IIa) mandate that where an Complaint is filed before Judicial/ Metropolitan magistrate, he must hear the complainant and his witnesses within 7 days of filing of Complaint and than pass Orders accordingly.
The details of Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate can be obtained from respective Police station or from any Court.
Arrests: The National Police Commission in its Third Report and the Law Commission in Oct 2000 on Law of Arrest have both identified indiscriminate arrests by Police in India is the chief source of Corruption in the Police. The Report, among other things, said, “the Power of Arrest must be used in the rarest of rare cases and not in a routine manner. A mere allegation of Commission of offence cannot constitute ground for arrest. It would be desirable that a Police Officer making an arrest should also record in the case diary, the reason for making the arrest.”
In the historic judgment of Hon SC in D K Basu Vs State of West Bengal, among other things, directed-
1) That Policemen must wear visible and legible identification when arresting a person and when carring out interrogation. Names and Particulars of police personnel handling interrogation must be recorded in the register.
2) It is the right of every person detained or questioned by Police to know the grounds for detention or questioning.
3) The Person arrested must be made aware of his right to have someone informed of his arrest Or detention as soon as he is put under arrest or detention.
4) A person arrested must be produced before a Judicial Magistrate/ Judge within 24 hours of his/her arrest.
5) A person arrested should be medically examined at the time of arrest and major & minor injuries on arrested person be recorded in Inspection Memo duly signed by both Police Officer carrying out the arrest and the person arrested and the copy of this memo be provided to the person arrested.
6) Any person arrested must be medically examined by a doctor from an independent and approved panel of doctors, every 48 hours during detention.
7) Arrest or Search of women should only take place in presence of Women Police Officers and it should not take place in night. And women should be detained separately from men.
8) While an accused is in Police custody, his lawyer should be permitted to visit him.
9) Information of the arrest of accused person should be given to the district Control Room and the State Police Headquarters.
However, this menace is to a substantial extent will dry down in the light of very recent Amendment brought in CrPC 1973 law. President Of India has already given its assent to this Law and it is only need to be notified to be operational.
This newly enacted law will take away the powers of the police to arrest in cases of alleged offences which carry a maximum sentence up to seven years of imprisonment.
Bar associations across the country have been protesting under the pretext that these CrPC amendment (Section 41, CrPC), doing away with mandatory arrest provisions, would remove fear from the minds of criminals who would misuse the provisions under the garb of personal liberty.
“What the bar associations will never tell you is that the police never had the power to make such arrests and that arrest is an exception and not the norm”, Said our new Home Minister Shri P Chidamabaram in an media interview. (Very Important)
Once the law, CrPC (Amendment) Act 2008, becomes effective, the police, instead of arresting the accused, will be obliged to issue him/her a “notice of appearance” for any offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. The person can be arrested only if he/she does not appear before the police in response to the notice.
Bails: In case of Bailable offences, it is binding on Police officer to grant bail if the person arrested produces proper surety. In cases of Non Bailable offences, the Police cannot grant bail, the decision is taken by Judicial Magistrate/ Judge only. In such cases the accused may seek bail from Judicial Magistrate/ Judge concerned through his representative/ Lawyer when he is produced within 24 hours of his/her arrest. Also, if he has been subjected to any beating or torture, the same should be brought before the Judicial Magistrate/ Judge.
Police Torture & Brutality: Section 330 and 331 of IPC provide for punishment for voluntarily causing hurt and section 29 of Indian Police Act 1861 provides for imprisonment for offences including unwarranted personal violence to any person in his custody.
In the light of Section 176 of CrPC 1973 Magistrate is bound to investigate every death in Custody.
Even it is mandatory for police to inform State Human Rights Commission or National Human Rights Commission about every custodial death.
Failure to implement strictest of guidelines on law of arrests and on Tortures as laid down by the SC in DK Basu Vs State Of West Bengal will render any Policeman to be hauled for Contempt of Court in any High Court of the Country.
Offences are also classifieds as Compoundable/ Non Compoundable: It implies that offences which can be settled between the accused person and the victim are termed as Compoundable offences; and offences which cannot be settled between the accused and the victim are termed as Non Compoundable offences.
Role of Police in curbing Public Nuisance:
CrPC 1973 Section 133. Conditional order for removal of nuisance (1) Whenever a District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially powered in this behalf by the State Government on receiving the report of a police officer or other information and on taking such evidence (if any) as he thinks fit, consider --
(a) That any unlawful obstruction or nuisance should be removed from any public place or from any way, river or channel, which is or may be lawfully used by the public: or(b) That the conduct of any trade or occupation or the keeping of any goods or merchandise; is injurious to the health or physical comfort of the community, and that in consequence such trade or occupation should be prohibited or regulated or such, goods or merchandise should be removed or the keeping thereof regulated; or(c) That the construction of any building, or the disposal of any substance, as is likely to occasion conflagration or explosion, should be prevented or stopped; or(d) That any building tent or structure, or any tree is in such a condition that it is likely to fill and thereby cause injury to persons living or carrying on business in the neighborhood or passing by, and that in consequence the removal, repair or support of such building, tent or structure, or the removal or support of such tree, is necessary: or(e) That any tank, well or excavation adjacent to any such way or public place should be fenced in such manner as to prevent danger arising to the public: or(f) That any dangerous animal should be destroyed, confined or otherwise disposed of,
Such Magistrate may make a conditional order requiring the person causing such obstruction or nuisance, or carrying on such trade or occupation, or keeping any such goods or merchandise, or owning, possessing or controlling such building, tent, structure, substance, talk well or excavation, or owning or possessing such animal or tree, within time to be fixed in the order-
(i) To remove such obstruction or nuisance; or(ii) To desist from carrying on, or to remove or regulate in such manner as may be directed, such trade or occupation, or to remove such goods or merchandise, or to regulate the keeping thereof in such manner as may be directed; or(iii) To prevent or stop the construction of such building, or to alter the disposal of such substance; or(iv) To remove, repair or support such building, tent or structure, or to remove or support such trees; or(v) To fence such tank, well or excavation; or(vi) To destroy, confine or dispose of such dangerous animal in the manner provided in the said order; or, if he objects so to do, to appear before himself or some other Executive Magistrate Subordinate to him at a time and place to be fixed by the order, and show cause, in the manner hereinafter provided, why the order should not be made absolute.(2) No order duly made by a Magistrate under this section shall be called in question in any civil court.Explanation. A "public place" includes also property belonging to the state, camping grounds and grounds left unoccupied for sanitary or recreative purposes.
(Ordinarily Power of District Magistrate are vested in District Collector. In Metropolitan cities, Commissioner of Police exercises and discharge duties of District Magistrate.)
Indian Penal Code- Section 268. Public nuisance ( Definition of Offence of Public Nuisance) A person is guilty of a public nuisance who does not act or is guilty of an illegal omission which causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right.A common nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage.
Indian Penal Code- Section 269. Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life
Indian Penal Code- Section 270. Malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life
Indian Penal Code Section 283. Danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation.
Indian Penal Code Section 290. Punishment for public nuisance in cases not otherwise provided for
Indian Penal Code Section 291. Continuance of nuisance after injunction to discontinue. Whoever repeats or continues a public nuisance, having been enjoined by any public servant who has lawful authority to issue such injunction not to repeat or continue such nuisance, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
Indian Penal Code- Section 431. Mischief by injury to public road, bridge, river or channel
Indian Penal Code- Section 432. Mischief by causing inundation or obstruction to public drainage attended with damage
Bombay Police Act, 1951, Applicable to whole of Maharashtra, Section 67. Police to regulate traffic, etc., in streets. It shall be the duty of a Police officer-
(a) to regulate and control the traffic in the streets, to prevent obstructions therein and to the best of his ability to prevent the infraction of any rule or order made under this Act or any other law in force for observance by the public in or near the streets;
(b) to keep order in the streets and at and within public bathing, washing and landing places, fairs, temples and all other places of public resort and in the neighbourhood of places of public worship during the time of public worship;
(c) to regulate resort to public bathing, washing and landing places, to prevent overcrowding thereat and in public ferry-boats and, to the best of his ability, to prevent the infraction of any rule or order lawfully made for observance by the public at any such place or on any such boat.
Police Wilful disregard in discharge of his duties, a Criminal Contempt Of Court: The process of administration of justice begins with the violation of a right of a person or the committing of an offence by a person, well before any FIR is filed OR case is registered in the court.
In the light of Contempt of Court Act- Section -2(c ), If Police refuses to register FIR or refuses to investigate the case or refuses to apprehend or arrest offenders or trying to protect the accused or the guilty in any way, than a Criminal contempt of Court u/s 2(c) (III) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 can be filed against them for causing obstruction in the administration of justice. However, the element of police acting illegally deliberately and consciously without any justification is essential. "A refusal to see the obvious, a failure to investigate the doubtful if sufficiently gross, furnishes evidence acting deliberately and consciously.
The Contempt Petition is filed in the High Court and the best part is that proceedings have to begin immediately. However, before filing Criminal Contempt of Court Petition, Sanction from Advocate general must be obtained. If they do not give sanction or does not reply within a reasonable time of 30 days, than Contempt petition can be filed informing the Court about sanction not given or no reply received.
Not only the Police but whoever including political interferes in the process of investigation or interferes during the trial of offence in the Court can be charged with obstructing in the administration of justice and thus it constitutes an serious offence of Criminal Contempt of Court. However, for offences which are enumerated in Indian Penal Code cannot become the subject matter of Criminal Contempt Of Court.
Other Offences:
Section 193 to 239 deals with Giving false evidence before Judicial proceedings; fabricating evidence; perjury; false statements; harboring an offender; offering bribery and inducements. The offences are Non Cognizable and Bailable.
IPC Section 153. Wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot-if rioting be committed-if not committed.
IPC Section 153A. Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.
IPC Section 166. Public servant disobeying law, with intent to cause injury to any person.
IPC Section 167. Public servant farming an incorrect document with intent to cause injury.
IPC Section 217. Public servant disobeying direction of law with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture
IPC Section 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property: Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
IPC Section 404. Dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death.
IPC Section 411. Dishonestly receiving stolen property: Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen property, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
IPC Section 413. Habitually dealing in stolen property: Whoever habitually receives or deals in property which he knows or has reason to believe to be stolen property, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
IPC Section 420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property: Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
IPC Section 441. Criminal trespass :Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property, Or having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with intent thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person, or with intent to commit an offence, is said to commit "criminal trespass".
IPC Section 463. Forgery.: [Whoever makes any false documents or electronic record part of a document or electronic record with, intent to cause damage or injury], to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.
IPC Section 503 to 510: Criminal intimidation, insult and Annoyance.
CrPC Section 197. Prosecution of Judges and public servants.
Landmark High Court and Supreme Court Judgments:
(1) “In BOMBAY(Criminal) 08/10/2008 (J-R) APPW/271/2007, a full bench judgment of the Bombay High Court had laid down that cops should register the FIR against the accused person within two days of being informed of commission of any cognizable offence.” The comprehensive judgment, among other things, says that, The law inescapably requires the police officer to register the information received by him in relation to commission of a cognizable offence. Under the scheme of the CrPC, no choice is vested in the police officer between recording or not recording the information received. Link to the judgment: http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/ordqryfbench_action.php?auth=cGFnZW5vPTUmam9mbGFnPUo= This Judgment of Bombay High Court or Judgments of any High Court can be used in any Court in India.
(2) SC finds illegal detention worse than death: In an important ruling with wide ramifications for individual liberty, the Supreme Court has held that personal liberty is the most important fundamental right of a citizen and illegal detention causes incalculable harm and humiliation to a person. A bench comprising Justices Altamas Kabir and Markandey Katju while quashing the detention order passed by Mumbai Police against petitioner Deepak Bajaj under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 observed, ‘if a person against whom a preventive detention order has been passed can show to the Court that the said detention order is clearly illegal, why should he be compelled to go to jail?’ The imperative necessity to protect those precious rights is a lesson taught by history and all human experience, the bench observed.‘Our founding fathers have lived through bitter years of the freedom struggle and seen an alien government trample upon the human rights of our citizens. It is for this reason that they have introduced Article 21 in the Constitution and provided for the writs of habeas corpus etc,’ they said.Justice Katju, in the 28-page judgement, quoted from the Bhagavad Gita to drive home his point that this dishonour of being sent to jail without any justification is worse than death for a self-respecting man.The apex court while making it clear that restrictions can be placed on these rights in the interest of public order, security of the state and the like, maintained that they are not to be lightly transgressed as individual liberty is an integral part of right to life. Source: UNI
(3) Sc Assails Unexplained Delay In Passing Detention Order: March 16, 2006The Supreme Court has held that unexplained delay in passing the detention order by the authorities is not permissible in law.A bench comprising Mr Justice S.B. Sinha and Mr Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan vide their judgment dated March 10 this year laid down the law while setting aside the impugned detention order passed against an industrialist, Rajinder Arora, whose export house was raided by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) on May 26,2004 and detention order was passed on March 31,2005.The Supreme Court has observed, It is trite law that an order of detention is not a curative or reformative or punitive action, but a preventive action, avowed object of which being to prevent the anti-social and subversive elements from imperiling the welfare of the country or the security of the nation or from disturbing the public tranquility or from indulging in smuggling activities or from engaging in illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances etc." While commenting on delay, the apex court ruled " that the delay caused in this case in issuing the order of detention has not been explained. In fact no reason in that behalf whatever has been assigned at all and for the reasons abovementioned the impugned order of detention can not be sustained which is set aside accordingly." (UNI)
(4) In Nawabkhan Abbaskhan V. St. of Gujrat , The Hon SC allows every person the discretion to make his own decision and disobey an order of the Govt. if in his opinion violates his fundamental rights or if he believes that such order is made for malafide intentions.
THe Hon. Court said , “the individual decision making by private person of public actions may be considered as a very radical approach .Grave cosequences involved in allowing discretion to disobey , someone may argue, but what is the remedy available to a person who has been subjected to an illegal order ?, Our legal system does not recognize the right to compensation for damage suffered by a person in obeying an illegal order . But if he is turn out to be wrong in his decision , of course he is answerable.”
(5) In Writ Petition (CRL) no 68 of 2008 (Latika Kumar vs. Govt of UP & Others). On 14th July 2008 , Justice BN Agarwal and Justice GS Singhvi " directed, “We feel that it is high time to give directions to Governments of all the States and Union Territories besides their Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police as the case may be to the effect that if steps are not taken for registration of F.I.Rs immediately and copies thereof are not made over to the complainants, they may move the concerned Magistrates by filing complaint petitions to give direction to the police to register case immediately upon receipt/production of copy of the orders and make over copy of the F.I.Rs to the complainants, within twenty four hours of receipt/production of copy of such orders. It may further give direction to take immediate steps for apprehending the accused persons and recovery of kidnapped/abducted persons and properties which were subject matter of theft or dacoity. In case F.I.Rs are not registered within the aforementioned time, and/or aforementioned steps are not taken by the police, the concerned Magistrate would be justified in initiating contempt proceeding against such delinquent officers and punish them for violation of its orders if no sufficient cause is shown and awarding stringent punishment like sentence of imprisonment against them inasmuch as the Disciplinary Authority would be quite justified in initiating departmental proceeding and suspending them in contemplation of the same.”
Writ of Habeas Corpus: A Writ Petition can be filed in the High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India, or in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of Constitution of India, to seek release of a person from unlawful detention, whether by Police or by any private person.
Role of Human Rights Commission: Human Rights Commission play a critical role as far as Police excesses on people are concerned. The basic objective of The Protection of Human Rights Act is to ensure Life and dignity of Life to every individual which is itself guaranteed to every individual by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Every individual, whether he is Citizen of India or not can avail the benefit of the provisions of the Act. The Commissions are chaired by Retired Chief Justice Of India or the retired Chief Justice of the High Courts and other persons of special knowledge and of high integrity.
Any individual, who is unlawfully, so deprived of his life or liberty or dignity of life, may approach the National Human Rights Commission or the State Human Rights Commission, which are constituted under this Act.
Help of legal expert is not required at all and simple hand written application incorporating the facts and causes is suffice to redress the grievances.
Very few people are aware of their legal rights and very little about their enforcement in Human rights Commission(HRC). The Act also envisages that any individual on behalf of the victim may approach this Commission for the redressal of the grievances of immediate victim.
There is no fee to be paid.
The Commission has enormous powers to give relief to the victims including monetary compensation. The Commission, if necessary, may approach the High Court or Supreme Court on behalf of the victim to give him/her justice.
Section 12 of the Act makes it obligatory on the Commission to take notice of every application so received. Human Rights Commission, in the light of section 12, has Special duty towards Undertrial prisoners.
It is a powerful weapon in the hands of citizen of India and of course this right is available to other persons who are resident of India but not a citizen of India.
National Human Rights Commission is situated at Faridkot House, Copernicus marg, New Delhi. The details of State Human Rights Commission can be obtained from National Human Rights Commission(NHRC) Website. Also, if details of State Human rights Commission are not available, than the complaint may be directed to NHRC and NHRC will transfer the Complaint to relevant State HRC if there exist any in the State. If not, than NHRC will itself proceed.
Role of Legal Services Authorities: Now we come to another Statute and that is The legal services authorities comes into picture to provide free and competent legal services to the weaker section of the society, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.
The National Legal services Authority at the National level, The State Legal services Authority in each State and The District Legal services Authority in each of the districts has been constituted under this Act; The State Govt. may constitute Taluka Legal services Authority in each of the Taluka of the district. The Supreme Court Legal services Committee and The High Court Legal services committee in each State have also been constituted.
The Authorities are chaired by Chief Justice of India, Chief Justice of the High Courts and other senior Advocates.
ENTITLEMENT TO LEGAL SERVICES. Criteria for giving legal services. -Every person who has to file or defend a case shall be entitled to legal services under this Act if that person, is-
(a) A member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe; (b) A victim of trafficking in human beings or beggar as referred to in Article 23 of the Constitution; (c) A women or a child; (d) A mentally ill or otherwise disabled person; (e) A person under circumstances of undeserved want such as being a victim of a mass disaster, ethnic violence, caste atrocity, flood, drought, earthquake or industrial disaster; (f) An industrial workman; or
(g) In custody, including custody in a protective home within the meaning of clause (g) of section 2 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (104 of 1956), or in a juvenile home within the meaning of clause (j) of section 2 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (53 of 1986), or in a psychiatric hospital or psychiatric nursing home within the meaning of clause (g) of section 2 of the Mental Health Act, 1987 (14 of 1987); or [(h) in receipt of annual income less than rupees nine thousand or such other higher amount as may be prescribed by the State Government, if the case is before a court other than the Supreme Court, and less than rupees twelve thousand or such other higher amount as may be prescribed by the Central Government, if the case is before the Supreme Court.] (Rules have already been amended to enhance this income ceiling).
A Person who satisfies any of the criteria specified in section 12 shall be entitled to receive legal services provided that the concerned Authority is satisfied that such person has a prima facie case to prosecute or to defend.
An affidavit made by a person as to his income may be regarded as sufficient for making him eligible to the entitlement of legal services under this Act unless the concerned Authority has reason to disbelieve such affidavit.
Addresses of District Legal Services may be obtained from High Court Legal Services Authorities situated at High Court.
National Legal Services Authority [NALSA]
Member Secretary,12/11 Jamnagar House,Shahjahan Rd,New Delhi-110011. Phone- 011-23386176, 23382778; Fax- 011-23382121.
Accident Victims and Role of Good Samaritan: The Supreme Court in Case No.: Appeal (civil) 919 of 2007, Date of Judgment: 23/02/2007 has ruled that all injured persons especially in the case of road traffic accidents, assaults, etc., when brought to a hospital / medical centre, have to be offered first aid, stabilized and shifted to a higher centre / government centre if required. It is only after this that the hospital can demand payment or complete police formalities. In case you are a bystander and wish to help someone in an accident, please go ahead and do so. Your responsibility ends as soon as you leave the person at the hospital. The Hospital bears the responsibility of informing the Police, giving first aid etc.
Important Voluntary Organizations:
ANHAD: Act Now for Harmony and Democracy. 23, Canning Lane, New Delhi-110001. e-mail: anhad.delhi@gmail.com website: www.anhadin.net Tel: (+91 11) 23070740 , (+91 11) 23070722
CHRI, Headquarter: CHRI New Delhi Office B-117, Second Floor, Sarvodaya Enclave, New Delhi - 110 017 INDIA Tel: +91-11-2685-0523, 2652-8152, 2686-4678, Fax: +91-11-2686-4688E-mail: info@humanrightsinitiative.org
CHRI London Office Institute of Commonwealth Studies, 28, Russell SquareLondon WC1B 5DS, UK Tel: +44-020-7-862-8857, Fax: +44-020-7-862-8820E-mail: chri@sas.ac.uk
CHRI Ghana OfficeHouse No.9, Samora Machel Street Asylum Down, opposite Beverly Hills Hotel, Near Trust Towers, Accra, Ghana. Tel/Fax: +00233-21-271170. E-mail: chriafrica@humanrightsinitiative.org / chri_info@yahoo.com.au / chriafrica@4u.com.gh
Common cause: Common Cause House, 5, Institutional Area, Nelson Mandela Road,Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Fax/Phone : 2613-1313.
Mail: commoncauseindia@gmail.com
Lok Raj Sangthana: A/ 479 sarita Vihar, New delhi 110076. Cell-098185754359 (Prakash); 09871955730(Pravin) Email: lokrajsangathan@yahoo.com
Transparency International India: Central Office: Q. No.4 Lajpat Bhavan, Lajpat Nagar, 4, New delhi- 110024. Ph. 011 26460826, Telefax: 011 26460825.
Project Office: Balwantray Mehta Vidya Bhavan, ASMA, Greater Kailash 2, New delhi- 110048. Ph. 011 29224519. Email- info@transparencyindia.org
Peoples Union For Civil Liberties (PUCL): 81 Sahayoga apartments, Mayur Vihar - Delhi 110091, India +91-011-2275 0014 (phone); +91-011-4215 1459 pp (fax)
Delhi PUCL Pushkar Raj email: rajpushkar@rediffmail.com
Vadodara13, Pratap Kunj Society, Karelibaug, Vadodara – 390 018Phone : 464210, 462328 Fax No: 340223 email: chinu@wilnetonline.net
Karnataka PUCL Ramdas Rao email: ramdas_rao@hotmail.comInternet list: puclblr-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Kerala PUCL Vilayody Venugopal-- General Secretary Jacob.v Lazer -- State treasurer email: jacobkaloor@yahoo.co.uk
Maharashtra PUCL S. P. Sathe, President, PUCL MaharashtraMumbai Yogesh Kamdar email: ykamdar@vsnl.com
Orssa: email: pramodini-pradhan@lycos.com
Rajesthan People's Union for Civil Liberties, Rajasthan49, Vivek Nagar, Station Road, Jaipur-302006, phone: 0141/2206139 (Prem Krishna Sharma) , 2591408, 2706483 ( Kavita Srivastava) e.mail: kavisriv@yahoo.com R. Niraimathi, President Namakkal, Phone: (PP Mr. Kanmani) 04288-267676Dr. V. Suresh (address as above), Gen,Secretary: Phone(Off): 044-25392459 or 25392464 (Res):044-24490324 or 24493494.Coimbatore Unit: No. 9, 4th Floor, India Towers, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore- 641 018. Phone: 9842279896; 9443039630 Email: pucl.coimbatore@gmail.com
PUDR: pudr@pudr.org
PUHR: http://en.wordpress.com/tag/peoples-union-for-human-rights/
Complaint to United Nations:
Human Rights Council and Treaties Division:
For complaints to the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, direct your correspondence and inquiries to: Petition Team, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations office at Geneva, 1211 Geneva 10. Switzerland. Fax: +41 22 91 79022 ( for urgent matters) Email- tb-petitions@ohchr.org
Direct Approach to Chief Justice of High Court or Supreme Court Or any other Justice of any Court: In situation of extreme urgency of life and death, the victims may instead of adhering to procedural formalities may directly approach the Court rooms of Chief Justice or any other Judge of High Court or any other Judge of any Court and apprise the Judge of facts of the case very briefly. However, the discipline of the Court must be maintained while narrating incident. Also, being the watchdog of rights of the people, a telegram to the Chief Justice of respective High Court may be sent apprising him about the violation of human right or excesses of Police if any.
Important Govt Org.
· Ministry of Home Affairs
· National Disaster Management Authority
· National Institute of Disaster Management
· National Foundation for Communal Harmony
Intelligence Bureau
· Border Security Force, Central Reserve Police Force , Central Industrial Security Force, Indo-Tibet Border Police, National Security Guard, Sashastra Seema Bal
· Assam Rifles,
· Bureau of Police Research & Development,
· National Institute of Criminology & Forensic Science
· Central Forensic Science Laboratory
· National Crime Record Bureau
· Directorate of Coordination Police Wireless
· Central Hindi Training Institute
· Central Translation Bureau
· Narcotics Control Bureau
· National Civil Defence College
· Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Police Academy
· National Fire Service College
· Inter-State Council Secretariate
· Director General of Civil Defence & Home Guards
· Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India
· Zonal Council Secretariate
· North Eastern Police Academy
· Parliament of India
· Chief Controller of Accounts Org.
· Disaster Management of India
· Department of Justice
· Department of Official Language
· National Human Right Commission
· North-East Council
· C.B.I.
Right to Information & Police: Every action of Police can be monitored with the help of RTI Act 2005. Like investigation so carried out in pursuant to a case, asking copy of FIR or any other document.
Among many other duties of police, important are
(a) promptly to serve every summons and obey and execute every warrant or other order lawfully issued to him by competent authority, and to endeavor by all lawful means to give effect to the lawful commands of his superior;
(b) to the best of his ability to obtain intelligence concerning the commission of cognizable offences or designs to commit such offences, and to lay such information and to take such other steps, consistent with law and with the orders of his superiors as shall be best calculated to bring offenders to justice or to prevent the commission of cognizable offences and within his view of non-cognizable offences;
(c) to prevent to the best of his ability the commission of public nuisances;
(d) to apprehend without unreasonable delay all persons whom he is legally authorized to apprehend and for whose apprehension there is sufficient reason ;
(e) to aid another Police officer when called on by him or in case of need in the discharge of his duty, in such ways as would be lawful and reasonable on the part of the officer aided;
(f) to discharge such duties as are imposed upon him by any law for the time being in force.
The Bombay Police Act 1951, Section 47. The Commissioner or District Superintendent may, on the application of any person, depute any additional number of Police to keep the peace, to preserve order or to enforce any of the provisions of this or any other Act in respect of any particular class or classes of offences or to perform any other Police duties at any place in the area under his charge.
Contact Media for Police Excesses.
The Times of India: Bennett,Coleman & Co Ltd, Times of India Building, Dr D N Road, Mumbai- 400001. Tel- 022-6635 3535; Fax: 022-22731144/1888.
The Indian Express: The Indian Express Online Media (Pvt) Ltd, 9&10, Bhadur Shah Zafar Marg, Express Building, ITO New Delhi -110002. Tel 011-23702086, 09891968097.
DNA: Diligent Media Corporation Ltd, DNA wing, Oasis Complex, Kamla Mills Compound, P B Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai400013. Tel 022-3988 8888;
The Bombay Samachar: Red House, S A Brelvi Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Tel- 022-22853691/ 22851744.
The Asian Age: 145 Mathuradas Mill Compound, Near Sai Mandir, N M Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400013. Tel 022-2495 5825; Fax- 022- 2496 5847
Hindustan Times: HT Media Ltd, Mahalaxmi Engineering estate, Lady Jamshedji First Cross Road, Mahim-West, Mumbai-400016. Tel. 022-66539200; Fax-022-66539260.
Mid-Day: Mid Day Multimedia Ltd, Peninsulla Centre, Dr S S Rao Road, Opp Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Parel, Mumbai- 400012. Tel- 022-24197198/99; Fax: 022-24143171.
NDTV: New Delhi Television Ltd, Sumer Kendra, P B Marg, Worli, Mumbai- 400018. Tel- 022-2490 0190, 3043 0000; Fax: 022-24950706.
Star TV: Star News Centre, Off Dr E Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400011. Tel- 022-6663 0000/0102; Fax: 022-6663 3030.
ZeeNews: Essel Studio, FC-19, Sector 16-A, Noida - 201301, India Phone:0120- 2511064 – 76
CNN IBN: Global Broadcast News, Express Trade Tower,
Plot No. 15-16, Sector-16A, Noida, Uttar Pradesh,
India – 201301 Phone: +91-120-4341818, 3987777 Fax: 0120-4324106
FORMAT OF THE F.I.R.
Book No. ___________
FORM NO. 24.5 (1)
FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
First Information of a Cognizable Crime Reported under Section 154, Criminal PenalCode
Police Station .................................... District .............................. No ..................
Date and hour of Occurrence .....................
1.
Date and hour when reported
2.
Name and residence of informer and complainant.
3.
Brief description of offence (with section) and of property carried off, if any.
4.
Place of occurence and distance and direction from the Police Station.
5.
Name & Address of the Criminal.
6.
Steps taken regarding investigation explanation of delay in regarding information.
7.
Date and Time of despatch from Police Station.
Signature .......................
Designation ................................
(First information to be recorded below)
NOTE:- The signature of seal or thumb impression of the informer should be at the end of the information and the signature of the Writer of (FIR) should be existed as usual.
FORMAT OF INFORMATION IN CASE OF NON-COGNIZABLE OFFENCES
Under Section 155 Criminal Procedure Code
Book No.______________
Page No.___________
S.No.
Thana District
Date Time Reason
1.
Date & Time of Report
2.
Name & Residence of Complaint
3.
Description of offence with Section
4.
Direction of occurence time & date
5.
Name and Full address of witness
Though due care has been observed, yet some discrepancies may have crept in. The Writer incurs no liability whatsoever, if readers’ incurs any loss of any nature, while using this material. The readers’ may take help of Legal experts where they feel necessary.
Sandeep Jalan,
Janhit Manch, Kuber Bhuvan,
Bajaj Road, Vile Parle West,
Mumbai-400056.
Email- legallyspeaking.jalan@gmail.com, notsolearned@gmail.com,
Date: 30th March 2009.
Also see : BMC / MCGM Contact Details, Central Government Ministries, Maharashtra Government Departments, Maharashtra Ministers Contact Details, Police : News Articles, Legal Resources
Preface: Everyone cherish freedom, be it leftist or rightist, human being or animal being, Prime minister of India or a footpath dweller of Mumbai. The right of personal liberty of every individual is one of the most cherished fundamental right in our Constitution of India.
The post Independence era OF INDIA shows that most of the laws inherited from British Rule that had colonial exploitation as their basis, were left untouched. The present Police Laws indeed so inherited is largely left intact. The modern legal system provides that as soon as an offence is committed the Criminal Law is set into motion, irrespective of the wishes of the injured party.
Although The Police force in India is known for all the wrong reasons- inefficiency, high handedness, brutality, corruption and being politicized, yet, it must also be stated that mere ruthless criticism will not improve Police efficiency for they function with a lot of constraints cannot be lose sight of.
We love to break traffic signals if there are NO watchdogs. We all so afraid of Police, ever thought why? Our watchdogs, our Justice System to check Police is simply absent.
One thing that terrorizes the most to a common man is fear of highhandedness of police who has presumably unbridled power to detain any person though maliciously.
The trauma and agony of an accused Undertrial prisoner and of his family members is beyond to be described and no amount of money compensation can bring back the valuable years of the innocent accused. The damage inflicted by unlawful detention is massive and ruthless. It bleeds the soul of the victim and may occasion the loss of livelihood of a family resulting in trap of ugly poverty.
Last and not the least. The accused is innocent till proven guilty. That ten guilty Man may escape but even one innocent should not be punished. This is the foundation on which the entire criminal Jurisprudence is built upon. That been so, how an innocent accused can be justified in captivity even for a day.
This small literature is aimed at informing Common man about various safeguards provided in law and so as to prevent police acting fanciful.
Citizenry Ignorance is the chief cause of Police causing excesses to them.
Illegal Detentions: A person so arrested / detained illegally even for one hour can file a Complaint against the person for making false Complaint (FIR), including the Police Officer causing illegal arrest/detention.
False Complaints: Where a false complaint been registered against any person, he may register an FIR against that person u/s 182 and 211 of IPC for making false complaint.
IPC Section 182. False information, with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person. IPC Section 211. False charge of offence made with intent to injure.
FIR: After a Complaint of an Offence is given, it should be immediately registered and it is the right of the Complainant to receive a Copy of the First Information Report (FIR) or NC (Non Cognizable Offence), as the nature of the complaint suggests. If Police refuses to register Complaint, the same can be sent by Post/ Telegram, to that Police Station or to Superintendent of Police of the district or Commissioner of Police as in Metropolitan cities.
In case of Non Cognizable Offences, after registering the same, since Police do not investigate the case, Complainant must be advised to approach the Magistrate court for further action. The address of Magistrate Court may be obtained from the Police Station itself.
Police cannot evade registering an offence on the plea that they do not have Jurisdiction. It is necessary that Offence is registered and the same is sent to the Police Station concerned.
If Police refuses to register complaint, than a Complaint may be made to Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate. There are series of HC and SC judgments wherein they have warned Police that they must register Complaint whoever comes to them.
Very Important: Also, wherever need so arises, relevant section of Indian Penal Code and / or Bombay High Court and Supreme Court Judgments, as stated hereinafter, must be brought before the Police, either verbally or by incorporating the same in written Complaint.
WHO CAN LODGE AN F.I.R.?
(1) Complainant who is an aggrieved person or some body on his behalf.
(2) By any person who is aware of the offence OR who is a witness to any offence.
(3) Provided the person in possession of the hearsay is required to subscribe his signature to it and mention the source of his information so that it does not amount to irresponsible rumors. The rule of law is, if general law is broken any person has a right to complain whether he has suffered an injury or not.
(4) By the accused himself.
(5) By the SHO(Station House Officer) on his own knowledge or information even when a cognizable offence is committed in view of a officer incharge he can register a case himself and is not bound to take down in writing any information. Under the order of Magistrate u/s 156 (3) Criminal Procedure code, when a complaint is forwarded to officer incharge without taking cognizance. If information is only hear say, then SHO should register case only if person in possession of hearsay subscribes his signature to it and mentions the source of his information so that it does not amount to irresponsible rumors. The information must be definite, not vague, authentic, not baseless, gossip or rumors, clearly making out a cognizable case.
WHAT ACTION CAN BE EXPECTED FROM THE POLICE IN NON-COGNIZABLE OFFENCE ?
1. The information regarding non-cognizable offence ought to get lodged in the Daily Diary Register.
2. Complainant ought to get advised & briefed properly to approach the Court.
3. Police officer can not investigate into the Non-cognizable cases without the order of the court hence complainant should be informed.
5. If an order regarding investigation into non-cognizable cases is received, the same procedure should be adopted as in the cognizable cases.
6. Orders of the court should be obtained to arrest the accused in Non cognizable cases after the investigation.
7. If one of the offences in the commission of crime is cognizable office then Non-cognizable offence should also be investigated in the same manner( as Cognizable offences are investigated.
WHAT DOES THE POLICE DO WHEN THE COMPLAINTS ARE DOUBTFUL ?
If the information or other intelligent relating to the alleged commission of a cognizable offence is such that an officer-in-charge of the police station has reason to suspect that the alleged offence has not been committed, he shall record the same in the station diary along with his reasons for not investigating the crime and also nullify the informer.
Inspector or Supervising Officer can direct the investigation in such case and may send the report to the District Magistrate for perusal and order.
Finger Tips:
FIR should be lodged immediately. The longer the delay, the stronger the suspicion. The delay should satisfactorily be explained. Delay, if any, in registering the case should be recorded in FIR.
Written complaint should be taken. But complainant should be specific while giving written statement.
Written statement should be duly signed or put thumb impression.
Only a report of cognizable offence should be lodged in FIR.
Place, Date & Time of occurrence should be mentioned in the FIR.
Arrival & Departure of the informer should be mentioned in the FIR as well as Daily Dairy Register.
Four copies of FIR should be prepared simultaneously by carbon paper process.
FIR should be lodged in neat & clean hand writing and be kept in safe custody being a permanent record.
A copy of FIR should be sent to Magistrate concerned immediately.
A copy of FIR should be provided to the complainant free of cost.
Care should be taken that all the material facts are mentioned in FIR as known to the complainant.
If information is available at the time, Names of the accused persons should occur in F.I.R., if not, FIR can be registered in unknown accused person.
An FIR once registered can only be quashed (cancelled) by High Court concerned.
Police Incorrectly framing FIR: When the victim or anybody on his behalf approaches the Police station to register/ file complaint, whether in the nature of Cognizable offence ( FIR) or Non Cognizable (N.C.) offence, it is the responsibility of police to correctly take down the complaint and thus register FIR or NC as the nature of offence so emerge from the complaint. Also, if the Complaint comprises both Cognizable and non Cognizable offences, then the offence should be treated as Cognizable Offence and thus FIR should be registered. Yet, if Police manipulate with registering FIR to NC or the other way round, then they may be charged with offence u/s 218 of IPC.
A copy of Every FIR or NC so registered by Police must be sent to respective Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate within 24 hours so that it cannot be tempered with.
Offence under IPC Section 218. Public servant framing incorrect record or writing with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture.
Filing Complaint with Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate: Where Police refuses to register Complaint, than a Complaint may be made to Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate of that area where the incident has took place, directing Police to register FIR and carry out investigation and submit report.
Also, a Person instead of going to Police, may directly approach Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate to file an Complaint u/s 190 of CrPC and thus the Magistrate on the merits of the case may direct the Police to register FIR/NC and investigate the case.
Very Important: High Court Criminal Manual Appellate Side- Chapter 3, Section 1A(IIa) mandate that where an Complaint is filed before Judicial/ Metropolitan magistrate, he must hear the complainant and his witnesses within 7 days of filing of Complaint and than pass Orders accordingly.
The details of Judicial/ Metropolitan Magistrate can be obtained from respective Police station or from any Court.
Arrests: The National Police Commission in its Third Report and the Law Commission in Oct 2000 on Law of Arrest have both identified indiscriminate arrests by Police in India is the chief source of Corruption in the Police. The Report, among other things, said, “the Power of Arrest must be used in the rarest of rare cases and not in a routine manner. A mere allegation of Commission of offence cannot constitute ground for arrest. It would be desirable that a Police Officer making an arrest should also record in the case diary, the reason for making the arrest.”
In the historic judgment of Hon SC in D K Basu Vs State of West Bengal, among other things, directed-
1) That Policemen must wear visible and legible identification when arresting a person and when carring out interrogation. Names and Particulars of police personnel handling interrogation must be recorded in the register.
2) It is the right of every person detained or questioned by Police to know the grounds for detention or questioning.
3) The Person arrested must be made aware of his right to have someone informed of his arrest Or detention as soon as he is put under arrest or detention.
4) A person arrested must be produced before a Judicial Magistrate/ Judge within 24 hours of his/her arrest.
5) A person arrested should be medically examined at the time of arrest and major & minor injuries on arrested person be recorded in Inspection Memo duly signed by both Police Officer carrying out the arrest and the person arrested and the copy of this memo be provided to the person arrested.
6) Any person arrested must be medically examined by a doctor from an independent and approved panel of doctors, every 48 hours during detention.
7) Arrest or Search of women should only take place in presence of Women Police Officers and it should not take place in night. And women should be detained separately from men.
8) While an accused is in Police custody, his lawyer should be permitted to visit him.
9) Information of the arrest of accused person should be given to the district Control Room and the State Police Headquarters.
However, this menace is to a substantial extent will dry down in the light of very recent Amendment brought in CrPC 1973 law. President Of India has already given its assent to this Law and it is only need to be notified to be operational.
This newly enacted law will take away the powers of the police to arrest in cases of alleged offences which carry a maximum sentence up to seven years of imprisonment.
Bar associations across the country have been protesting under the pretext that these CrPC amendment (Section 41, CrPC), doing away with mandatory arrest provisions, would remove fear from the minds of criminals who would misuse the provisions under the garb of personal liberty.
“What the bar associations will never tell you is that the police never had the power to make such arrests and that arrest is an exception and not the norm”, Said our new Home Minister Shri P Chidamabaram in an media interview. (Very Important)
Once the law, CrPC (Amendment) Act 2008, becomes effective, the police, instead of arresting the accused, will be obliged to issue him/her a “notice of appearance” for any offence punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. The person can be arrested only if he/she does not appear before the police in response to the notice.
Bails: In case of Bailable offences, it is binding on Police officer to grant bail if the person arrested produces proper surety. In cases of Non Bailable offences, the Police cannot grant bail, the decision is taken by Judicial Magistrate/ Judge only. In such cases the accused may seek bail from Judicial Magistrate/ Judge concerned through his representative/ Lawyer when he is produced within 24 hours of his/her arrest. Also, if he has been subjected to any beating or torture, the same should be brought before the Judicial Magistrate/ Judge.
Police Torture & Brutality: Section 330 and 331 of IPC provide for punishment for voluntarily causing hurt and section 29 of Indian Police Act 1861 provides for imprisonment for offences including unwarranted personal violence to any person in his custody.
In the light of Section 176 of CrPC 1973 Magistrate is bound to investigate every death in Custody.
Even it is mandatory for police to inform State Human Rights Commission or National Human Rights Commission about every custodial death.
Failure to implement strictest of guidelines on law of arrests and on Tortures as laid down by the SC in DK Basu Vs State Of West Bengal will render any Policeman to be hauled for Contempt of Court in any High Court of the Country.
Offences are also classifieds as Compoundable/ Non Compoundable: It implies that offences which can be settled between the accused person and the victim are termed as Compoundable offences; and offences which cannot be settled between the accused and the victim are termed as Non Compoundable offences.
Role of Police in curbing Public Nuisance:
CrPC 1973 Section 133. Conditional order for removal of nuisance (1) Whenever a District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially powered in this behalf by the State Government on receiving the report of a police officer or other information and on taking such evidence (if any) as he thinks fit, consider --
(a) That any unlawful obstruction or nuisance should be removed from any public place or from any way, river or channel, which is or may be lawfully used by the public: or(b) That the conduct of any trade or occupation or the keeping of any goods or merchandise; is injurious to the health or physical comfort of the community, and that in consequence such trade or occupation should be prohibited or regulated or such, goods or merchandise should be removed or the keeping thereof regulated; or(c) That the construction of any building, or the disposal of any substance, as is likely to occasion conflagration or explosion, should be prevented or stopped; or(d) That any building tent or structure, or any tree is in such a condition that it is likely to fill and thereby cause injury to persons living or carrying on business in the neighborhood or passing by, and that in consequence the removal, repair or support of such building, tent or structure, or the removal or support of such tree, is necessary: or(e) That any tank, well or excavation adjacent to any such way or public place should be fenced in such manner as to prevent danger arising to the public: or(f) That any dangerous animal should be destroyed, confined or otherwise disposed of,
Such Magistrate may make a conditional order requiring the person causing such obstruction or nuisance, or carrying on such trade or occupation, or keeping any such goods or merchandise, or owning, possessing or controlling such building, tent, structure, substance, talk well or excavation, or owning or possessing such animal or tree, within time to be fixed in the order-
(i) To remove such obstruction or nuisance; or(ii) To desist from carrying on, or to remove or regulate in such manner as may be directed, such trade or occupation, or to remove such goods or merchandise, or to regulate the keeping thereof in such manner as may be directed; or(iii) To prevent or stop the construction of such building, or to alter the disposal of such substance; or(iv) To remove, repair or support such building, tent or structure, or to remove or support such trees; or(v) To fence such tank, well or excavation; or(vi) To destroy, confine or dispose of such dangerous animal in the manner provided in the said order; or, if he objects so to do, to appear before himself or some other Executive Magistrate Subordinate to him at a time and place to be fixed by the order, and show cause, in the manner hereinafter provided, why the order should not be made absolute.(2) No order duly made by a Magistrate under this section shall be called in question in any civil court.Explanation. A "public place" includes also property belonging to the state, camping grounds and grounds left unoccupied for sanitary or recreative purposes.
(Ordinarily Power of District Magistrate are vested in District Collector. In Metropolitan cities, Commissioner of Police exercises and discharge duties of District Magistrate.)
Indian Penal Code- Section 268. Public nuisance ( Definition of Offence of Public Nuisance) A person is guilty of a public nuisance who does not act or is guilty of an illegal omission which causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right.A common nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage.
Indian Penal Code- Section 269. Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life
Indian Penal Code- Section 270. Malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life
Indian Penal Code Section 283. Danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation.
Indian Penal Code Section 290. Punishment for public nuisance in cases not otherwise provided for
Indian Penal Code Section 291. Continuance of nuisance after injunction to discontinue. Whoever repeats or continues a public nuisance, having been enjoined by any public servant who has lawful authority to issue such injunction not to repeat or continue such nuisance, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.
Indian Penal Code- Section 431. Mischief by injury to public road, bridge, river or channel
Indian Penal Code- Section 432. Mischief by causing inundation or obstruction to public drainage attended with damage
Bombay Police Act, 1951, Applicable to whole of Maharashtra, Section 67. Police to regulate traffic, etc., in streets. It shall be the duty of a Police officer-
(a) to regulate and control the traffic in the streets, to prevent obstructions therein and to the best of his ability to prevent the infraction of any rule or order made under this Act or any other law in force for observance by the public in or near the streets;
(b) to keep order in the streets and at and within public bathing, washing and landing places, fairs, temples and all other places of public resort and in the neighbourhood of places of public worship during the time of public worship;
(c) to regulate resort to public bathing, washing and landing places, to prevent overcrowding thereat and in public ferry-boats and, to the best of his ability, to prevent the infraction of any rule or order lawfully made for observance by the public at any such place or on any such boat.
Police Wilful disregard in discharge of his duties, a Criminal Contempt Of Court: The process of administration of justice begins with the violation of a right of a person or the committing of an offence by a person, well before any FIR is filed OR case is registered in the court.
In the light of Contempt of Court Act- Section -2(c ), If Police refuses to register FIR or refuses to investigate the case or refuses to apprehend or arrest offenders or trying to protect the accused or the guilty in any way, than a Criminal contempt of Court u/s 2(c) (III) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 can be filed against them for causing obstruction in the administration of justice. However, the element of police acting illegally deliberately and consciously without any justification is essential. "A refusal to see the obvious, a failure to investigate the doubtful if sufficiently gross, furnishes evidence acting deliberately and consciously.
The Contempt Petition is filed in the High Court and the best part is that proceedings have to begin immediately. However, before filing Criminal Contempt of Court Petition, Sanction from Advocate general must be obtained. If they do not give sanction or does not reply within a reasonable time of 30 days, than Contempt petition can be filed informing the Court about sanction not given or no reply received.
Not only the Police but whoever including political interferes in the process of investigation or interferes during the trial of offence in the Court can be charged with obstructing in the administration of justice and thus it constitutes an serious offence of Criminal Contempt of Court. However, for offences which are enumerated in Indian Penal Code cannot become the subject matter of Criminal Contempt Of Court.
Other Offences:
Section 193 to 239 deals with Giving false evidence before Judicial proceedings; fabricating evidence; perjury; false statements; harboring an offender; offering bribery and inducements. The offences are Non Cognizable and Bailable.
IPC Section 153. Wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot-if rioting be committed-if not committed.
IPC Section 153A. Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.
IPC Section 166. Public servant disobeying law, with intent to cause injury to any person.
IPC Section 167. Public servant farming an incorrect document with intent to cause injury.
IPC Section 217. Public servant disobeying direction of law with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture
IPC Section 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property: Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
IPC Section 404. Dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death.
IPC Section 411. Dishonestly receiving stolen property: Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen property, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
IPC Section 413. Habitually dealing in stolen property: Whoever habitually receives or deals in property which he knows or has reason to believe to be stolen property, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
IPC Section 420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property: Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
IPC Section 441. Criminal trespass :Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property, Or having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with intent thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person, or with intent to commit an offence, is said to commit "criminal trespass".
IPC Section 463. Forgery.: [Whoever makes any false documents or electronic record part of a document or electronic record with, intent to cause damage or injury], to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property, or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.
IPC Section 503 to 510: Criminal intimidation, insult and Annoyance.
CrPC Section 197. Prosecution of Judges and public servants.
Landmark High Court and Supreme Court Judgments:
(1) “In BOMBAY(Criminal) 08/10/2008 (J-R) APPW/271/2007, a full bench judgment of the Bombay High Court had laid down that cops should register the FIR against the accused person within two days of being informed of commission of any cognizable offence.” The comprehensive judgment, among other things, says that, The law inescapably requires the police officer to register the information received by him in relation to commission of a cognizable offence. Under the scheme of the CrPC, no choice is vested in the police officer between recording or not recording the information received. Link to the judgment: http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/ordqryfbench_action.php?auth=cGFnZW5vPTUmam9mbGFnPUo= This Judgment of Bombay High Court or Judgments of any High Court can be used in any Court in India.
(2) SC finds illegal detention worse than death: In an important ruling with wide ramifications for individual liberty, the Supreme Court has held that personal liberty is the most important fundamental right of a citizen and illegal detention causes incalculable harm and humiliation to a person. A bench comprising Justices Altamas Kabir and Markandey Katju while quashing the detention order passed by Mumbai Police against petitioner Deepak Bajaj under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 observed, ‘if a person against whom a preventive detention order has been passed can show to the Court that the said detention order is clearly illegal, why should he be compelled to go to jail?’ The imperative necessity to protect those precious rights is a lesson taught by history and all human experience, the bench observed.‘Our founding fathers have lived through bitter years of the freedom struggle and seen an alien government trample upon the human rights of our citizens. It is for this reason that they have introduced Article 21 in the Constitution and provided for the writs of habeas corpus etc,’ they said.Justice Katju, in the 28-page judgement, quoted from the Bhagavad Gita to drive home his point that this dishonour of being sent to jail without any justification is worse than death for a self-respecting man.The apex court while making it clear that restrictions can be placed on these rights in the interest of public order, security of the state and the like, maintained that they are not to be lightly transgressed as individual liberty is an integral part of right to life. Source: UNI
(3) Sc Assails Unexplained Delay In Passing Detention Order: March 16, 2006The Supreme Court has held that unexplained delay in passing the detention order by the authorities is not permissible in law.A bench comprising Mr Justice S.B. Sinha and Mr Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan vide their judgment dated March 10 this year laid down the law while setting aside the impugned detention order passed against an industrialist, Rajinder Arora, whose export house was raided by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) on May 26,2004 and detention order was passed on March 31,2005.The Supreme Court has observed, It is trite law that an order of detention is not a curative or reformative or punitive action, but a preventive action, avowed object of which being to prevent the anti-social and subversive elements from imperiling the welfare of the country or the security of the nation or from disturbing the public tranquility or from indulging in smuggling activities or from engaging in illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances etc." While commenting on delay, the apex court ruled " that the delay caused in this case in issuing the order of detention has not been explained. In fact no reason in that behalf whatever has been assigned at all and for the reasons abovementioned the impugned order of detention can not be sustained which is set aside accordingly." (UNI)
(4) In Nawabkhan Abbaskhan V. St. of Gujrat , The Hon SC allows every person the discretion to make his own decision and disobey an order of the Govt. if in his opinion violates his fundamental rights or if he believes that such order is made for malafide intentions.
THe Hon. Court said , “the individual decision making by private person of public actions may be considered as a very radical approach .Grave cosequences involved in allowing discretion to disobey , someone may argue, but what is the remedy available to a person who has been subjected to an illegal order ?, Our legal system does not recognize the right to compensation for damage suffered by a person in obeying an illegal order . But if he is turn out to be wrong in his decision , of course he is answerable.”
(5) In Writ Petition (CRL) no 68 of 2008 (Latika Kumar vs. Govt of UP & Others). On 14th July 2008 , Justice BN Agarwal and Justice GS Singhvi " directed, “We feel that it is high time to give directions to Governments of all the States and Union Territories besides their Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police as the case may be to the effect that if steps are not taken for registration of F.I.Rs immediately and copies thereof are not made over to the complainants, they may move the concerned Magistrates by filing complaint petitions to give direction to the police to register case immediately upon receipt/production of copy of the orders and make over copy of the F.I.Rs to the complainants, within twenty four hours of receipt/production of copy of such orders. It may further give direction to take immediate steps for apprehending the accused persons and recovery of kidnapped/abducted persons and properties which were subject matter of theft or dacoity. In case F.I.Rs are not registered within the aforementioned time, and/or aforementioned steps are not taken by the police, the concerned Magistrate would be justified in initiating contempt proceeding against such delinquent officers and punish them for violation of its orders if no sufficient cause is shown and awarding stringent punishment like sentence of imprisonment against them inasmuch as the Disciplinary Authority would be quite justified in initiating departmental proceeding and suspending them in contemplation of the same.”
Writ of Habeas Corpus: A Writ Petition can be filed in the High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India, or in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of Constitution of India, to seek release of a person from unlawful detention, whether by Police or by any private person.
Role of Human Rights Commission: Human Rights Commission play a critical role as far as Police excesses on people are concerned. The basic objective of The Protection of Human Rights Act is to ensure Life and dignity of Life to every individual which is itself guaranteed to every individual by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Every individual, whether he is Citizen of India or not can avail the benefit of the provisions of the Act. The Commissions are chaired by Retired Chief Justice Of India or the retired Chief Justice of the High Courts and other persons of special knowledge and of high integrity.
Any individual, who is unlawfully, so deprived of his life or liberty or dignity of life, may approach the National Human Rights Commission or the State Human Rights Commission, which are constituted under this Act.
Help of legal expert is not required at all and simple hand written application incorporating the facts and causes is suffice to redress the grievances.
Very few people are aware of their legal rights and very little about their enforcement in Human rights Commission(HRC). The Act also envisages that any individual on behalf of the victim may approach this Commission for the redressal of the grievances of immediate victim.
There is no fee to be paid.
The Commission has enormous powers to give relief to the victims including monetary compensation. The Commission, if necessary, may approach the High Court or Supreme Court on behalf of the victim to give him/her justice.
Section 12 of the Act makes it obligatory on the Commission to take notice of every application so received. Human Rights Commission, in the light of section 12, has Special duty towards Undertrial prisoners.
It is a powerful weapon in the hands of citizen of India and of course this right is available to other persons who are resident of India but not a citizen of India.
National Human Rights Commission is situated at Faridkot House, Copernicus marg, New Delhi. The details of State Human Rights Commission can be obtained from National Human Rights Commission(NHRC) Website. Also, if details of State Human rights Commission are not available, than the complaint may be directed to NHRC and NHRC will transfer the Complaint to relevant State HRC if there exist any in the State. If not, than NHRC will itself proceed.
Role of Legal Services Authorities: Now we come to another Statute and that is The legal services authorities comes into picture to provide free and competent legal services to the weaker section of the society, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.
The National Legal services Authority at the National level, The State Legal services Authority in each State and The District Legal services Authority in each of the districts has been constituted under this Act; The State Govt. may constitute Taluka Legal services Authority in each of the Taluka of the district. The Supreme Court Legal services Committee and The High Court Legal services committee in each State have also been constituted.
The Authorities are chaired by Chief Justice of India, Chief Justice of the High Courts and other senior Advocates.
ENTITLEMENT TO LEGAL SERVICES. Criteria for giving legal services. -Every person who has to file or defend a case shall be entitled to legal services under this Act if that person, is-
(a) A member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe; (b) A victim of trafficking in human beings or beggar as referred to in Article 23 of the Constitution; (c) A women or a child; (d) A mentally ill or otherwise disabled person; (e) A person under circumstances of undeserved want such as being a victim of a mass disaster, ethnic violence, caste atrocity, flood, drought, earthquake or industrial disaster; (f) An industrial workman; or
(g) In custody, including custody in a protective home within the meaning of clause (g) of section 2 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (104 of 1956), or in a juvenile home within the meaning of clause (j) of section 2 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (53 of 1986), or in a psychiatric hospital or psychiatric nursing home within the meaning of clause (g) of section 2 of the Mental Health Act, 1987 (14 of 1987); or [(h) in receipt of annual income less than rupees nine thousand or such other higher amount as may be prescribed by the State Government, if the case is before a court other than the Supreme Court, and less than rupees twelve thousand or such other higher amount as may be prescribed by the Central Government, if the case is before the Supreme Court.] (Rules have already been amended to enhance this income ceiling).
A Person who satisfies any of the criteria specified in section 12 shall be entitled to receive legal services provided that the concerned Authority is satisfied that such person has a prima facie case to prosecute or to defend.
An affidavit made by a person as to his income may be regarded as sufficient for making him eligible to the entitlement of legal services under this Act unless the concerned Authority has reason to disbelieve such affidavit.
Addresses of District Legal Services may be obtained from High Court Legal Services Authorities situated at High Court.
National Legal Services Authority [NALSA]
Member Secretary,12/11 Jamnagar House,Shahjahan Rd,New Delhi-110011. Phone- 011-23386176, 23382778; Fax- 011-23382121.
Accident Victims and Role of Good Samaritan: The Supreme Court in Case No.: Appeal (civil) 919 of 2007, Date of Judgment: 23/02/2007 has ruled that all injured persons especially in the case of road traffic accidents, assaults, etc., when brought to a hospital / medical centre, have to be offered first aid, stabilized and shifted to a higher centre / government centre if required. It is only after this that the hospital can demand payment or complete police formalities. In case you are a bystander and wish to help someone in an accident, please go ahead and do so. Your responsibility ends as soon as you leave the person at the hospital. The Hospital bears the responsibility of informing the Police, giving first aid etc.
Important Voluntary Organizations:
ANHAD: Act Now for Harmony and Democracy. 23, Canning Lane, New Delhi-110001. e-mail: anhad.delhi@gmail.com website: www.anhadin.net Tel: (+91 11) 23070740 , (+91 11) 23070722
CHRI, Headquarter: CHRI New Delhi Office B-117, Second Floor, Sarvodaya Enclave, New Delhi - 110 017 INDIA Tel: +91-11-2685-0523, 2652-8152, 2686-4678, Fax: +91-11-2686-4688E-mail: info@humanrightsinitiative.org
CHRI London Office Institute of Commonwealth Studies, 28, Russell SquareLondon WC1B 5DS, UK Tel: +44-020-7-862-8857, Fax: +44-020-7-862-8820E-mail: chri@sas.ac.uk
CHRI Ghana OfficeHouse No.9, Samora Machel Street Asylum Down, opposite Beverly Hills Hotel, Near Trust Towers, Accra, Ghana. Tel/Fax: +00233-21-271170. E-mail: chriafrica@humanrightsinitiative.org / chri_info@yahoo.com.au / chriafrica@4u.com.gh
Common cause: Common Cause House, 5, Institutional Area, Nelson Mandela Road,Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Fax/Phone : 2613-1313.
Mail: commoncauseindia@gmail.com
Lok Raj Sangthana: A/ 479 sarita Vihar, New delhi 110076. Cell-098185754359 (Prakash); 09871955730(Pravin) Email: lokrajsangathan@yahoo.com
Transparency International India: Central Office: Q. No.4 Lajpat Bhavan, Lajpat Nagar, 4, New delhi- 110024. Ph. 011 26460826, Telefax: 011 26460825.
Project Office: Balwantray Mehta Vidya Bhavan, ASMA, Greater Kailash 2, New delhi- 110048. Ph. 011 29224519. Email- info@transparencyindia.org
Peoples Union For Civil Liberties (PUCL): 81 Sahayoga apartments, Mayur Vihar - Delhi 110091, India +91-011-2275 0014 (phone); +91-011-4215 1459 pp (fax)
Delhi PUCL Pushkar Raj email: rajpushkar@rediffmail.com
Vadodara13, Pratap Kunj Society, Karelibaug, Vadodara – 390 018Phone : 464210, 462328 Fax No: 340223 email: chinu@wilnetonline.net
Karnataka PUCL Ramdas Rao email: ramdas_rao@hotmail.comInternet list: puclblr-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Kerala PUCL Vilayody Venugopal-- General Secretary Jacob.v Lazer -- State treasurer email: jacobkaloor@yahoo.co.uk
Maharashtra PUCL S. P. Sathe, President, PUCL MaharashtraMumbai Yogesh Kamdar email: ykamdar@vsnl.com
Orssa: email: pramodini-pradhan@lycos.com
Rajesthan People's Union for Civil Liberties, Rajasthan49, Vivek Nagar, Station Road, Jaipur-302006, phone: 0141/2206139 (Prem Krishna Sharma) , 2591408, 2706483 ( Kavita Srivastava) e.mail: kavisriv@yahoo.com R. Niraimathi, President Namakkal, Phone: (PP Mr. Kanmani) 04288-267676Dr. V. Suresh (address as above), Gen,Secretary: Phone(Off): 044-25392459 or 25392464 (Res):044-24490324 or 24493494.Coimbatore Unit: No. 9, 4th Floor, India Towers, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore- 641 018. Phone: 9842279896; 9443039630 Email: pucl.coimbatore@gmail.com
PUDR: pudr@pudr.org
PUHR: http://en.wordpress.com/tag/peoples-union-for-human-rights/
Complaint to United Nations:
Human Rights Council and Treaties Division:
For complaints to the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, direct your correspondence and inquiries to: Petition Team, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations office at Geneva, 1211 Geneva 10. Switzerland. Fax: +41 22 91 79022 ( for urgent matters) Email- tb-petitions@ohchr.org
Direct Approach to Chief Justice of High Court or Supreme Court Or any other Justice of any Court: In situation of extreme urgency of life and death, the victims may instead of adhering to procedural formalities may directly approach the Court rooms of Chief Justice or any other Judge of High Court or any other Judge of any Court and apprise the Judge of facts of the case very briefly. However, the discipline of the Court must be maintained while narrating incident. Also, being the watchdog of rights of the people, a telegram to the Chief Justice of respective High Court may be sent apprising him about the violation of human right or excesses of Police if any.
Important Govt Org.
· Ministry of Home Affairs
· National Disaster Management Authority
· National Institute of Disaster Management
· National Foundation for Communal Harmony
Intelligence Bureau
· Border Security Force, Central Reserve Police Force , Central Industrial Security Force, Indo-Tibet Border Police, National Security Guard, Sashastra Seema Bal
· Assam Rifles,
· Bureau of Police Research & Development,
· National Institute of Criminology & Forensic Science
· Central Forensic Science Laboratory
· National Crime Record Bureau
· Directorate of Coordination Police Wireless
· Central Hindi Training Institute
· Central Translation Bureau
· Narcotics Control Bureau
· National Civil Defence College
· Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Police Academy
· National Fire Service College
· Inter-State Council Secretariate
· Director General of Civil Defence & Home Guards
· Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India
· Zonal Council Secretariate
· North Eastern Police Academy
· Parliament of India
· Chief Controller of Accounts Org.
· Disaster Management of India
· Department of Justice
· Department of Official Language
· National Human Right Commission
· North-East Council
· C.B.I.
Right to Information & Police: Every action of Police can be monitored with the help of RTI Act 2005. Like investigation so carried out in pursuant to a case, asking copy of FIR or any other document.
Among many other duties of police, important are
(a) promptly to serve every summons and obey and execute every warrant or other order lawfully issued to him by competent authority, and to endeavor by all lawful means to give effect to the lawful commands of his superior;
(b) to the best of his ability to obtain intelligence concerning the commission of cognizable offences or designs to commit such offences, and to lay such information and to take such other steps, consistent with law and with the orders of his superiors as shall be best calculated to bring offenders to justice or to prevent the commission of cognizable offences and within his view of non-cognizable offences;
(c) to prevent to the best of his ability the commission of public nuisances;
(d) to apprehend without unreasonable delay all persons whom he is legally authorized to apprehend and for whose apprehension there is sufficient reason ;
(e) to aid another Police officer when called on by him or in case of need in the discharge of his duty, in such ways as would be lawful and reasonable on the part of the officer aided;
(f) to discharge such duties as are imposed upon him by any law for the time being in force.
The Bombay Police Act 1951, Section 47. The Commissioner or District Superintendent may, on the application of any person, depute any additional number of Police to keep the peace, to preserve order or to enforce any of the provisions of this or any other Act in respect of any particular class or classes of offences or to perform any other Police duties at any place in the area under his charge.
Contact Media for Police Excesses.
The Times of India: Bennett,Coleman & Co Ltd, Times of India Building, Dr D N Road, Mumbai- 400001. Tel- 022-6635 3535; Fax: 022-22731144/1888.
The Indian Express: The Indian Express Online Media (Pvt) Ltd, 9&10, Bhadur Shah Zafar Marg, Express Building, ITO New Delhi -110002. Tel 011-23702086, 09891968097.
DNA: Diligent Media Corporation Ltd, DNA wing, Oasis Complex, Kamla Mills Compound, P B Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai400013. Tel 022-3988 8888;
The Bombay Samachar: Red House, S A Brelvi Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Tel- 022-22853691/ 22851744.
The Asian Age: 145 Mathuradas Mill Compound, Near Sai Mandir, N M Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400013. Tel 022-2495 5825; Fax- 022- 2496 5847
Hindustan Times: HT Media Ltd, Mahalaxmi Engineering estate, Lady Jamshedji First Cross Road, Mahim-West, Mumbai-400016. Tel. 022-66539200; Fax-022-66539260.
Mid-Day: Mid Day Multimedia Ltd, Peninsulla Centre, Dr S S Rao Road, Opp Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Parel, Mumbai- 400012. Tel- 022-24197198/99; Fax: 022-24143171.
NDTV: New Delhi Television Ltd, Sumer Kendra, P B Marg, Worli, Mumbai- 400018. Tel- 022-2490 0190, 3043 0000; Fax: 022-24950706.
Star TV: Star News Centre, Off Dr E Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400011. Tel- 022-6663 0000/0102; Fax: 022-6663 3030.
ZeeNews: Essel Studio, FC-19, Sector 16-A, Noida - 201301, India Phone:0120- 2511064 – 76
CNN IBN: Global Broadcast News, Express Trade Tower,
Plot No. 15-16, Sector-16A, Noida, Uttar Pradesh,
India – 201301 Phone: +91-120-4341818, 3987777 Fax: 0120-4324106
FORMAT OF THE F.I.R.
Book No. ___________
FORM NO. 24.5 (1)
FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
First Information of a Cognizable Crime Reported under Section 154, Criminal PenalCode
Police Station .................................... District .............................. No ..................
Date and hour of Occurrence .....................
1.
Date and hour when reported
2.
Name and residence of informer and complainant.
3.
Brief description of offence (with section) and of property carried off, if any.
4.
Place of occurence and distance and direction from the Police Station.
5.
Name & Address of the Criminal.
6.
Steps taken regarding investigation explanation of delay in regarding information.
7.
Date and Time of despatch from Police Station.
Signature .......................
Designation ................................
(First information to be recorded below)
NOTE:- The signature of seal or thumb impression of the informer should be at the end of the information and the signature of the Writer of (FIR) should be existed as usual.
FORMAT OF INFORMATION IN CASE OF NON-COGNIZABLE OFFENCES
Under Section 155 Criminal Procedure Code
Book No.______________
Page No.___________
S.No.
Thana District
Date Time Reason
1.
Date & Time of Report
2.
Name & Residence of Complaint
3.
Description of offence with Section
4.
Direction of occurence time & date
5.
Name and Full address of witness
Though due care has been observed, yet some discrepancies may have crept in. The Writer incurs no liability whatsoever, if readers’ incurs any loss of any nature, while using this material. The readers’ may take help of Legal experts where they feel necessary.
Sandeep Jalan,
Janhit Manch, Kuber Bhuvan,
Bajaj Road, Vile Parle West,
Mumbai-400056.
Email- legallyspeaking.jalan@gmail.com, notsolearned@gmail.com,
Date: 30th March 2009.
Also see : BMC / MCGM Contact Details, Central Government Ministries, Maharashtra Government Departments, Maharashtra Ministers Contact Details, Police : News Articles, Legal Resources
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
http://dowacochin.blogspot.com
Posts
All Comments