Thursday, August 12, 2010

Lok Sabha clears Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill, 2010 curbing police powers

Lok Sabha clears Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill, 2010 curbing police powers


IANS, Aug 12, 2010, 07.53pm IST

NEW DELHI: The Lok Sabha Thursday approved the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill, 2010, that makes policing more transparent. Under it a police officer will compulsorily have to keep a written record justifying the arrest or freeing an accused wanted in a crime that carries imprisonment up to seven years.

The bill was passed by a voice vote after home minister P Chidambaram introduced it in the Lok Sabha.

"The amendment increases the transparency of a policeman's action as he has to justify arresting or not arresting an accused and keep a written record of it," Chidambaram told the house.

The amendment once enacted would mean that the police cannot make needless arrests or, under pressure or duress, let go people who may be wanted in crimes punishable with imprisonment for a term seven years or more.

The legislation is aimed to curb arbitrariness of police arrests. Since the reasons have to be recorded in writing, the legislation fixes the responsibility and makes a police officer justify the arrest or letting go of an accused.

The written record would be subjected to judicial scrutiny and recording an arbitrary reason would be difficult for police. It lays a large emphasis on investigation before the arrest is made.

The bill has to go to Rajya Sabha now before being enacted into law.

The home minster said the bill also carries a clause according to which if "a person, at any time, fails to comply with the terms of police notice or is unwilling to identify himself, the police officer may, subject to such orders as may have been passed by a competent court in this behalf, arrest him for the offence mentioned in the notice".

also more news @

NEW DELHI: A bill, seeking to amend a section of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) with regard to arrest of a person, was passed by the Lok Sabha with the government asserting that it would reduce "arbitrariness" in apprehension of people and bring about transparency.

The Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill, 2010, passed by voice vote after a debate, provides for mandatory recording of reasons in the case of arrest or non-arrest of a person suspected in a cognizable offence for which the jail term is less than seven years.

Prior to the amendment to Section 41 of the CrPC Act, the law said a police officer "may" record reasons of arrest or non-arrest of a person, Home Minister P Chidambaram said while replying to the debate.

According to the amended bill, if a person is not arrested in a non-cognizable offence, police will have to issue notice to him to join investigations.

The prevailing law says a police officer "may" issue a notice to a person, who is not arrested, for joining investigation. The amendment, making it mandatory to issue notice for joining the investigation, is to ensure that the person does not delay the probe by not cooperating, Chidambaram said.

If anybody, on whom a notice is served, refuses to identify himself, he will be arrested forthwith, he said. Justifying the amendments, Chidambaram said, "This is to ensure that "arbitrariness" is reduced or "at least the scope of arbitrariness is reduced."

Rejecting suggestions that the amendments could enable police to misuse powers, he said it would bring about transparency in the system of arrests. "Give it a fair trial of six months or so," the Home Minister said while seeking endorsement of the House to the amendment Bill. On the recording of reasons in case of arrest, he said the arrested person would have a right to approach a court to challenge the action if he is not convinced.

Similarly, in case of non-arrest, the complainant can approach a court to question the police action, he said. Talking about overall police system in the country, he said the Centre had framed a Model Police Act in 2006 but states were "not forthcoming" to bring their police laws in tune with it despite being repeatedly asked to. "It is my intention to continue pressing the states," he said.

Delhi govt appoints children’s judges

Delhi govt appoints children’s judges

NEW DELHI: In a bid to provide justice to oppressed children, the Delhi government has appointed judicial officers for manning nine children courts in the capital.
‘‘Lt Governor of national capital territory of Delhi, hereby, specifies courts of additional sessions judges at each police district for the trial of offences against children and of violation of children’s rights in the capital,’’ an official communique said informing about the judicial forum.
The capital, which has been divided into nine districts to facilitate better policing, will now have equal number of children’s judges. On behalf of the LG, director of Women and Child Development of Delhi Government, Rajiv Kale, has apprised the judicial officers of their new assignments.
The chief justice of the Delhi high court has also given his nod to the new initiative, the communique said. The children’s courts have been constituted under the provisions of the Commission of Child Rights Act and they will deal with almost every issues pertaining to their rights and the violations. Poonam Chaudhary, Vinod Kumar, Nivedita A Sharma, J R Aryan, Pinki, V K Khanna, Raj Kapoor, Sanjay Kumar and Sudhir Kumar, all additional sessions judges, have

SHO, SI held for graft – for cahooting with opponent party in a matrimonial dispute

SHO, SI held for graft

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, August 11
Sleuths of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) today arrested SHO of the Industrial Area police station Dilsher Singh, a sub-inspector Hans Raj and two others for allegedly accepting Rs 40,000 from a Panchkula resident, who is involved in a cheating case.

CBI officials said two persons, identified as Jhujjar Singh, owner of a tea stall near the police station, and Satwant Sethi, had accepted of Rs 40,000 from the complainant on the behalf of police officials.

Jhujjar Sethi was talking over phone with sub-inspector Hans Raj when he was caught red-handed while accepting the money. The CBI team simultaneously apprehended Sethi and sub-inspector Hans Raj.

Sources said the complainant, Gagan Gupta, a resident of Modern Housing Complex, Panchkula, had a matrimonial dispute with his wife. He is contesting a case in the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking custody of his minor son. On August 3, a case of cheating and impersonation was reregistered against Gagan Gupta and his friend at the Industrial Area police station for giving a false advertisement in a newspaper on a complaint lodged by the counsel of the opposite party. It was alleged that the advertisement was given to harass the counsel contesting the case against Gupta.

The CBI said that Gupta had obtained an anticipatory bail in the case. Sub-inspector Hans Raj had contacted him seeking bribe for favouring him in the case, the CBI said.

Hans Raj called Gupta to the police station where he had a discussion with SHO Dilsher Singh. Assuring him of help, Hans Raj demanded a bribe of Rs1 lakh initially and later settled the deal for Rs 40,000, the CBI said.

Dilsher is the second SHO in the Chandigarh Police arrested by the CBI in a corruption case. Earlier, inspector Bishi Ram was arrested from the Mani Majra police station on similar charges.

Minor husband can be guardian of minor wife: Delhi High Court

Minor husband can be guardian of minor wife

New Delhi, Aug 11 – ‘A husband who is a minor can be the guardian of his minor wife,’ the Delhi High court Wednesday said, coming to the rescue of a minor couple by setting aside criminal cases filed against the boy by his wife’s family.

‘No other person can be appointed as the guardian of a minor girl, unless we find that her husband is unfit to act as her guardian for reasons other than his minority,’ said the court.

The court also told the government to educate youth about the ills of early marriage.

Despite their marriage, the two were not allowed to live together after the girl’s family raised serious objection to the marriage.

Providing relief to the couple, Sunil (18) and Neena (16), both names changed, a division bench of Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed and Justice V.K. Jain set aside the rape and abduction cases filed against the boy and allowed the girl to stay with him.

‘Neena’s welfare is of paramount importance, we are of the view that her welfare would be best served if she were to live with her husband. She would get the love and affection of her husband,’ observed the bench.

‘She would have the support of her in-laws who, as we have mentioned earlier, welcomed her. She cannot be forced or compelled to continue to reside at Nirmal Chhaya or some other such institution as that would amount to her detention against her will and would be violative of her rights guaranteed under article 21 of the constitution (protection of liberty),’ the court said.

The court also suggested that the state must take measures to educate the youth that getting married early places a huge burden on their development.

It also said that at the same time, when such marriages occur, they should be treated in a different manner.

‘The sooner the legislature examines these issues and comes out with a comprehensive and realistic solution, the better, or else courts will be flooded with habeas corpus petitions and judges would be left to deal with broken hearts, weeping daughters, devastated parents and petrified young husbands running for their lives chased by serious criminal cases, when their sin is that they fell in love,’ observed the bench.

Sunil and Neena got married May 3 at Sahibabad in Uttar Pradesh. Immediately after their marriage, Neena’s father lodged a first information report against Sunil accusing him of rape and abduction.

Three days later, police apprehended the couple from Rampur in Uttar Pradesh.

A trial court sent Sunil to a juvenile welfare home and Neena was handed over to her parents.

In her statement before a magistrate, she did not say anything against Sunil.

Later, she again ran away from her home and told a court that she did not wish to stay with her parents after which she was sent to a welfare home.

Her father moved the court challenging the marriage saying it was invalid as both of them were minors.

But the court rejected his plea and said: ‘Her natural guardian is no longer her father but her husband. A husband who is a minor can be the guardian of his minor wife.’

Taking care of mother, children statutory duty of MCD: HC

Taking care of mother, children statutory duty of MCD: HC


New Delhi, Aug 11 (PTI) The MCD has a statutory duty to see that women and children are properly looked after, the Delhi High Court said and dismissed a PIL seeking a direction to the civic agency not to build a Maternity and Child Welfare Home to prevent "wastage" of public money.

"Taking care of the child is national duty. No one should forget that the child is the father of man.It is the duty of MCD to see that women and children are properly looked after.It is the women who nourish and foster the children who eventually build the nation," said a Division Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Manmohan. "We really fail to fathom when a centre for maternity home and child welfare is established to serve the cause of the women and children who really need help and assistance, how can the same amount to wastage of public exchequer," the Bench said and dismissed the PIL.

The Delhi Anusuchit Jati Vikas Sangathan, a registered society, through a PIL sought a direction prohibiting MCD from spending Rs 2.50 crore and a land measuring 1000 square metre in B Block, JJ colony-II in Nangloi area as the same land was earmarked for construction of a school.

"When an effort has been made to take care of mothers, it is unfathomable how someone can come up and make such a grievance," the Bench said.

Employee can be sacked even if released on probation: SC

Employee can be sacked even if released on probation: SC

11 Aug 2010, 2046 hrs IST,PTI

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has held that an employee can be dismissed for moral turpitude even if he or she is released under the Probation of Offenders Act after being convicted for an offence.
"The conviction in a criminal case is one part of the case and release on probation is another. Therefore, grant of benefit of the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, only enables the delinquent not to undergo the sentence on showing his good conduct during the period of probation.
"In case, after being released, the delinquent commits another offence, benefit of Probation of Offenders' Act, 1958, gets terminated and the delinquent can be made liable to undergo the sentence. Therefore, in case of an employee who stands convicted for an offence involving moral turpitude, it is his misconduct that leads to his dismissal," a Bench of justices BS Chauhan and Deepak Verma said in a judgement.
The apex court passed the judgement while dismissing an appeal filed by Sushil Kumar Singhal, a peon, challenging his dismissal from Punjab National Bank in 1988 for embezzling Rs 5,000 given to him for paying the bank's telephone bill.
Though he was convicted under Section 409 IPC (criminal breach of trust), the appeallate court released him under the 1958 Probation of Offenders Act.
Singh sought reinstatement on the plea that he was released under the Act which did not amount to conviction. The appeallate court and the Punjab& Haryana High Court had dismissed his plea, following which he appealed in the apex court.