India, Maharashtra, vijay kumbhar, News, Governance, RTI, Transparency, Civic Issues, Real Estate: Bombay High Court

Showing posts with label Bombay High Court. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 2, 2018

DSK SCAM: HC Postpones hearing on MD & CEO Shirish Kulkarni’s anticipatory bail to 4th may ..

Shirish Deepak Kulkarni's anticipatory bail application case in Bombay High Court is now postponed to 4th May 2018. Shirish is one of the accused in DSK Scam.

After Bombay High Court withdrew interim protection from arrest granted a multi-crore cheating case Deepak and Hemanti Kulkarni of D S Kulkarni Developers Ltd are already arrested by Pune police and are in judicial custody for more than 2.5 months.. The Kulkarnis have been charged with cheating over 9000 investor and Banks for around Rs3000 crore and were booked by the EOW.

Earlier Pune special court had rejected anticipatory bail application filed by Shirish Kulkarni. The special court has categorically observed that ‘ in this case protection of the interest of depositors if of prime consideration and investing officer has to see how to the said interest is to be protected . It prima facie appears that hundreds and thousands of depositors of DSK goup have become panic for not getting their amount of deposits and therefore their interest can be safeguarded by conducting a proper investigation.

After that Shirish Kulkarni had moved to Bombay High Court.

Meanwhile, there is another hearing that will be conducted in Kolhapur sessions court tomorrow i.e 3rd May 2018.

An FIR has been lodged in Rajarampurri police station of Kolhapur against Deepak, Hemanti and Shirish Kulkarni under Maharashtra Protection of interest of Depositors Act.

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Co Operative Societies Are Bound To Supply Information Under RTI - Bombay HC

In a recent land mark development Nagpur bench of Bombay high court has ruled that urban cooperative banks, cooperative financial institutions, Patpedhis and other cooperative societies are bound to supply information under Right to information act ( RTI) . After supreme court’s order in Thalappalam Ser.Coop.Bank Ltd.vs State Of Kerala all the public authorities and PIO’s I were blatantly saying that RTI act was not applicable to co operative societies.Actulally even in Thalappalam case the apex in paragraph 52 of its judgment had categorically said that the PIO of Registrar of Cooperative Societies is duty bound to supply the information which his department can have access under the Cooperative Societies Act from a Society . But even then PIO’s and co operative societies were denying the information sought under RTI.

The Bombay high court in it judgement ha categorically said that “The provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act if read with the definition of information given in section 2(f) of the Act, it can be said that everything which is mentioned in the definition of information needs to be supplied by the cooperative institution to the authority created under the Cooperative Societies Act. The definition of 'Public Authority' given in section 2(h) shows that such public authority can be created by any law made by the State Legislature. It is already observed that the officers like Registrar and his subordinate officers are appointed under the Cooperative Societies Act and they have the control over the aforesaid things.”

The court also observed that cooperative institutions, are registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. They are bodies created by the statute. But right from the registration till the liquidation there is control over these institutions of the authority created under the same Act.

The petitioner the association of Jalgaon Zilla Urban Cooperative Banks, Credit Societies and other financial institutions registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act 1960 had filed a petition requesting court to Hold and declare that the urban cooperative banks, cooperative financial institutions, Patpedhis and other cooperative societies which are registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act 1960, are not the public authorities within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act. Their contention was that in view of the provision of section 34A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 these institutions were not bound to disclose certain information which, according to them, was confidential in nature. It was also contented that those institutions were not receiving financial aid from the Government directly or indirectly and so the provisions of the Act cannot be made applicable to them

Petitioners had also requested High Court to restrain the officers of the cooperative department and their subordinates from supplying any information to the members or general public, which is, according to the said societies is confidential in the commercial interests of the said societies and for that purpose issue necessary orders.

The Bombay High court denying all the reliefs claimed by petitioners also referred to apex courts views in jayantilal mestry case in which the supreme court had said that RBI was supposed to uphold public interest and not the interest of individual banks. RBI is clearly not in any fiduciary relationship with any bank.

Thursday, February 9, 2017

Reshma Bhosale’s Candidature is Abuse of Election Procedure

It seems that corporator Reshma bhosale’s candidature for elections is always dangerous for officers . Last time after winning municipal election she had to face property tax receipt forgery case. FIR was lodged against her along with her husband MLA Anil Bhosale and some officers of pune municipal corporation. This time even after high court decision in her candidature case dust doesn’t seem to be settled down. Facts placed before high court in this case raise more doubts and may be troublesome for some officers.

In this case counsel appearing for the Election Commission submitted that as the Returning Officer was not decisive as to whether she should accept the nomination paper of Reshma Bhosale as independent or as a candidate belonging to Bharatiya Janata Party ( BJP),she sought guidance from the Election Commission through the Commissioner of Corporation. However actually on Saturday i.e. on 4^th February itself the returning officer of Panel No. 7 had rejected Reshma Bhosale's nomination as a candidate of the ( BJP). The reason cited was that Bhosale submitted her nomination as a Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) candidate, but submitted A and B forms of BJP.

It was also submitted in High court that returning officer in her communication to chief election officer had clearly mentioned and indicated that she had accepted the nomination paper of both the candidates, Satish Bahirat and Reshma Bhosale as valid as independent candidates.

In this case HC observed that once returning officer had taken decision to accept nomination paper there was no occasion for the Returning Officer to pass a separate order accepting the same nomination paper twice.

The big question is, once decision was taken why would returning officer seek further guidance from higher authorities. If she wanted any guidance she would have asked it before rejecting Reshma Bhosale’s claim for candidature of BJP on 4^th February itself. On that day she had heard rival arguments and had rejected Reshma Bhosale’s claim then how come they say that returning officer was not decisive?

Now there are two possibilities that chief election office kunal kumar sought guidance from state election commission .First possibility is that returning officer Vijaya pangarkar even after decision was taken asked for the further guidance from state election commission through kunal kumar and then changed her decision of declaring Reshma Bhosale as independent candidate. And second possibility is Pune municipal commissioner kunal kumar on his own sought guidance from state election commission and then asked returning officer vijay pangarakar to change her decision.

In both the cases favouritism and abuse of election process is there.Kunal Kumar while speaking to media had described this case as unique case. However there was nothing unique in that . In every elections hundreds of candidates file their nominations expecting nomination from parties. But when they don’t get AB form their candidature is declared as independent. Reshma bhosale’s case was the same. The only unique thing in it was she had BJP’s AB form in hand. That AB form compelled all officers to abuse the process of election.

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website – http://surajya.org/

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

Twitter - https://twitter.com/Vijaykumbhar62

YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/user/kvijay14

Sunday, October 4, 2015

Custodial death, family obtains information under RTI, files writ, Court orders government to pay compensation

Bombay high court recently awarded cost of rupees five lacs to the deceased under trial prisoner’s family. The family had obtained the relevant information under the Right to Information act and had filed a criminal writ petition in Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court. Recently Government of Maharashtra has complied with court’s orders.

Under trial prisoner Namdeo Vaijanath Sable died in Beed central jail. He was lodged in jail as per orders of judicial magistrate, majalgaon. On 28.3.2009 at about 2.00 a.m. Namdeo started vomiting. He was taken to Civil Hospital but was declared dead. Only thereafter the incident was informed to the Namdeo’s family. In the post mortem report doctor gave opinion that Namdeo died due to head injury. Subsequently FIR was lodged.. The employees at the prison had beaten Namdeo; he sustained head injury and died.

Namdeo’s wife made several representations that her husband had been killed in the prison, however as usual nobody heard her pleas. The newspaper reports also claimed that Namdeo died due to negligence in giving medical attention. When in spite of representations to various authorities, nothing happened, Namdeos family filed application under Right to Information Act and obtained copy of FIR and medical report. Due to this information it was confirmed that cause of death was head injury.

Custodial Death Photo Courtsey Dnaindia.com

Then Namdeo’s family filed a criminal writ petition in Aurangabad bench of Bombay high Court. High Court held that when a prisoner enters the prison, he is responsibility of the State. He has to be protected by the State from other inmates in the cell and even from the prison officials.

High Court also observed that, there is no reason why the State should not have cameras including night vision cameras, to cover all portions of the prison other than the changing room and toilets. There is no reason why, when such incident takes place, the State is unable to show from scientific evidence of video recordings as to what exactly happened when the victim is alleged to have slept in the cell along with other prisoners.

Video recording can show the truth. If the State fails to make provision to make such scientific evidence available, the State cannot escape the liability whenever such death occurs while the person is in the custody or in the prison. There is a tendency between jail officials to protect each other when one of them is responsible. The other inmates in the prison can be intimidated or for various reasons, their silence can be procured when prison officials are involved in atrocities on any inmate.

Photo Courtsey newindianexpress.com

HC also directed the State Government to consider inquest report recorded by Executive Magistrate Abhay Devidas Mhaske and read the same with the post mortem report and looking to the manner in which this inquest panchanama was recorded, take suitable action against the Executive Magistrate for his approach while recording the inquest panchanama which was either negligent or a conscious effort to shield those who were guilty at the prison

Photo Courtsey Yashada.org

Court ordered to pay compensation of rupees five lacs to the petitioners, however left it at the liberty of State to recover the amount of compensation, interest and costs as directed to be paid, from respondents i.e then jailor Dattatraya Devrao Sonawane, Havaldar Ramesh Tarachand Devre and Jamadar Babusing Devrao Solunke or such other officials as it may find to be responsible.

High Court also asked to deposit compensation amount with interest and costs within two months from the date of judgment i.e. 14 July 2015 , accordingly stategovernment has issued GR in that regard on 3 October 2015 . However GR doesn’t mention anything about recovering of said cost from anybody. Meanwhile jailor, Dattatraya Devrao Sonawane has been sentenced to 5 years of Jail term by district and sessions court of Beed on 25 September 2012.

Monday, September 7, 2015

Maharashtra circular on sedition makes politicians and public servants “self proclaimed Government”

The bureaucracy in Maharashtra has once again put government in embarrassing position. It had left no stone unturned to be more powerfully than lawfully elected government. And unfortunately elected representatives have also succumbed to their wits. The blame game on governments circular on sedition has started .Oppositions have questioned intentions of government behind this circular, while Chief Minister of Maharashtra Devendra Fadnavis has placed the responsibility for the circular on the former Congress-NCP government.

Photo Courtsey pratimview.blogspot.in

CM has clarified that the circular is a direct translation of an HC decision. And that was based on the previous government's affidavit in the High Court. He has also termed media’s interpretation as “laughable” . However scenario is very different, the circular is not direct translation but twisted translation of original act and what had been put in The High Court on affidavit.

Out of 5 points only first 2 points of this circular are under criticism. In 1^st point words “लोकसेवक व सरकारचे प्रतिनिधी” means “ public servants and representatives of Government” have been mischievously inserted and that has caused the entire controversy .

In original act the words used in section 124A are “Whoever, by words, either spoken

or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life”

In the affidavit place in order state government has submitted that it would send guideline to police personal to take precaution while imposing section 124A . And 1^st point of this affidavit reads “The words, signs or representations must bring the Government (Central or State) into hatred or contempt or must cause or attempt to cause disaffection, enmity or disloyalty to the Government and the words/signs/ representation must also be an incitement to violence or must be intended or tend to create public disorder or a reasonable apprehension of public disorder;”

Photo Courtsey limenlemony.files.wordpress.com

If we read care carefully in original act or in an affidavit placed in High Court words “लोकसेवक व सरकारचे प्रतिनिधी” means “public servants and representatives of Government” were not there. However in circular while translating, these words seem to have been inserted. Point 1 of this circular reads “तोंडी किंवा लेखी शब्दांद्वारे अथवा खुणांद्वारे, अगर दृश्य अथवा अन्य मार्गामार्फत केंद्र अथवा राज्य सरकार, लोकसेवक व सरकारचे प्रतिनिधी यांच्याबद्दल द्वेष, तुच्छता, अप्रीती, अवमान, असंतोष, शत्रुत्व, द्रोहभावना अथवा बेइमानी याची भावना दर्शवित असली पाहिजे. अशा प्रकारचे शब्द,खुणा किंवा प्रदर्शन अभिव्यक्ती हिंसाचारास प्रवृत्त करणारी किंवा जनतेत असंतोष निर्माण करणारी असली पाहिजे”.

Who and why the inserted words “public servants and representatives of Government” is matter of investigation. However this can be termed as an attempt to amend law by issuing circular.

The next point of this circular is connected with point no 1. In Marathi it says’ सदर लेखी किंवा तोंडी शब्द, खुणा अथवा कोणत्याही प्रकारची अभिव्यक्ती यामधून राजकारणी अथवा लोकसेवक हे शासनाचे प्रतिनिधी असल्याचे ध्वनित होईल, त्यावेळीच सदर कलम लावण्यात यावे. That means “said (above mentioned) words/signs/representations show politicians or public servants as representative of the Government then only above section should be applied”. Actually in 1^st point word “politician” is not there but suddenly it appears in 2^nd point of Marathi translation.

Photo Courtsey whatoneearth.in

In affidavit filed in high court point no 2 is “Words, signs or representations against politicians or public servants by themselves do not fall in this category unless the words/signs/ representations show them as representative of the Government”. This point actually exempts from any immunity for politician and public servants from section 124 A. however Marathi translation not only provides such immunity it puts ‘freedom of speech and expression” in danger.

Point no 5 of this circular and affidavit placed in High Court is the only hope to assume that this will not be misused it says’ Before applying section 124A district law officer should be consulted and then within tow weeks Advocate generals opinion should sought.”. Fortunately in circular also same words have been kept untouched. Hence it is very difficult for police personal to apply section 124A to any one without Advocate Generals opinion.

However major question who did this mischief and why? It is not the first instance that bureaucracy has done such mischief. The most recent examples are.

1) It attempted to amend CrPC 156, With this amendment courts would not be able direct Police to file FIR without the sanction of the competent authority. This was clear attempt to shield both government servants as well as elected members. This would have made it harder to make accountable government servants and public representatives

2) In Maharashtra Right to public Services Act (MRTPS) they have eliminated all other fields except Governance from the Right to Public services Commissioners that are to be appointed under MRTPS. Section 13 (5) . It says the chief commissioner or commissioners shall be the persons of eminence in public life with wide knowledge and experience in administration in government or public authority. That means there will be only babus as CICs and ICs of commission

Photo Courtsey www.manjul.com

3) Under MRTPS imposition amount of a penalty has left to be specified by the State Government from time to time by notification in the Official Gazette. This is the trick to kill the act before its inception. If penalty provision is not fixed in the act itself, babus will time and again try to minimize or remove it completely by mere notifications.

4) To make public servants accountable government of Maharashtra introduced Delay in Discharge of Official Duties Act, 2005’, PoDiDoODA however bureaucracy never allowed to implement it properly. The funniest part is that the rules for PoDiDoODA came in to force in November 2013 i.e. after seven years of its promulgation. Hence, citizen’s charter was not implemented in many departments. And even after rules were framed the act was not implemented.

5) Many circulars were issued from Mantralay of Maharashtra since 1996 to express commitment to eradicate corruption and illegalities. Right to Information (RTI) Act was introduced soon afterwards. There was a provision for stringent action against illegalities exposed through the use of RTI. So far, 13 circulars have been issued for action against those involved in corruption and illegalities. But till today no action has been taken against any public servant according to these circulars.

In short bureaucracy has always tried to keep upper hand on democracy and unfortunate thing is elected representatives succumbed to their (Bureaucrats) wits for reason best known to them only.

Saturday, September 5, 2015

Why is there so much Hue and cry over , Maharashtra Government’s guidelines on sedition charges ?

“Maharashtra curbs criticism ofpoliticians”, “Anti-democracy guidelines on Section 124 IPC by Maharashtra government”, “You risk sedition charges for criticising politicians”, “Criticisinggovernment can be sedition in Maharashtra now’ , “fresh guidelines on sedition; draws Opposition flak”, “Criticise government, face sedition charges in Maharashtra”, Thus were the headlines on Maharashtra government’s fresh guidelines on IPC 124 .

Photo Courtsey https://whennoodlesdream.files.wordpress.com

Reaction on this guidelines were very serious and with full of anger. I was also not exception for that. My first reaction on Facebook was also same. However careful reading of government resolution issued in this regard and High Court order shows that there is nothing much in that GR. Actually with this GR government has asked police to take adequate precaution before applying sedition charges on anyone.

These guidelines on IPC 124-Ahave been issued with regard to the assurance given to the Bombay High Court in the cartoonist Aseem Trivedi for his cartoons during the India Against Corruption movement headed by Anna Hazare. Aseem Trivedi was arrested by Mumbai Police in 2012 for drawing cartoons that allegedly insulted the national emblem and Parliament. The assurance was given in the HC when sedition charges were dropped against him.

Reproduced here are points in GR

(i) The words, signs or representations must bring the Central or State Government into hatred or contempt or must cause or attempt to cause disaffection, enmity or disloyalty to the Government and the words/signs/ representation must also be an incitement to violence or must be intended or tend to create public disorder or a reasonable apprehension of public disorder;

(ii) Words, signs or representations against politicians or public servants by themselves do not fall in this category unless the words/signs/representations show them as representative of the Government

Photo Courtsey truthdive.com

(iii) Comments expressing disapproval or criticism of the Government with a view to obtaining a change of government by lawful means without any of the above are not seditious under Section 124A;

(iv) Obscenity or vulgarity by itself should not be taken into account as a factor or consideration for deciding whether a case falls within the purview of Section 124A of

IPC,

(v) A legal opinion in writing which gives reasons addressing the aforesaid must be obtained from Law Officer of the District followed within two weeks by a legal opinion in writing from Public Prosecutor of the State.

Then why there is so much hue and cry about this GR?. Reason is simple. People strongly believe that literary genius in Mantralay i.e. bureaucrats issue circulars only to harass citizens or to protect their colleagues. It becomes a case of “you tell me the person and I shall tell you the circular”, thus putting into action only those circulars, which benefit the officers or their cronies. These circulars are always cleverly drafted. If some issue is to be evaded or to be framed, then the choice of words is so 'creative' as to abash even a litterateur. Perhaps these circulars would pass off as pieces of excellent literary talent.

Photo courtesy http://www.binayaksen.net

There can be a debate on validity of section 124 (A) in democracy. British colonial government felt the need to include this provision to suppress the liberty of the citizen India. How this section can be valid in Government OF the People, BY the People, FOR the People. But that apart. What wrong government of Maharashtra has done in this case? It has just sent guidelines while invoking section 124 (a) of IPC. The government has also clarified that the GR is not a government order and is only an advisory, which can be accepted or not.

Actually these guidelines are sent to avoid application of IPC 124 (A) . However it is the drafting of these guidelines that has caused entire debacle. Literary geniuses in Mantralay have once again succeeded in spreading confusion and doubt in peoples mind.

Monday, August 10, 2015

Government appoints Committee to test correctness of Pune divisional commissioner’s inquiry report in five year old girls death

On Bombay High courts direction government of Maharashtra has appointed one man committee to inquire intocorrectness of the report filed by Pune divisional commissioner S Choklingam in5 year old girl’s death due to fatal administrative negligence. Soufiya was a victim of a serious disease known as “Hydrocephalus with CP”. Due to such serious disease of brain, her both hands as well as legs were affected.

Photo courtsey Moneylife.in

On 5th February HC had directed Solapur Zilha Parishad to pay 5 lakh rupees as compensation to soufiyas parents and also ordered Pune Divisional commissioner to to hold an inquiry into the aspect of delay and fix the responsibilities for the fatal delay. HC had also asked divisional commission to direct initiation of a departmental inquiry against all those who were responsible for this fatal delay.

However divisional commissioner in his inquiry report had come to the conclusion that neither the Civil Surgeon nor the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad was responsible for the delay. After perusing said report HC foundthat the correctness of the report needs to be tested and directed the Principal Secretary of the Health Department of the State Government to nominate appropriate higher officer to look into the entire record of the inquiry and to record his own conclusions in the matter after considering the report of the Divisional Commissioner.

S Choklingam

Under The Central Governments “Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan”Zilla Parishads identify the disabled and poor students and provide them medical treatment in recognized hospitals. In soufiyas’ case, health camps were organized for the purposes of examining the children who were suffering from various disabilities in Solapur district. Civil Surgeon of District Solapur submitted a report on 6 th July 2013 to the Chief Executive Officer of Solapur Zilla Parishad. The said report was based on the report submitted by Shri Annasaheb Shinde Mhaisalkar Charitable Trust, Sangli. The said Trust examined disabled students needing surgery. The said Trust submitted a detailed report as regards 29 students.

Then Civil Surgeon recommended the said proposal for sanction. However no order was immediately issued by the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad. The said order was belatedly issued on 3^rd September 2013. Unfortunately, the said girl Sofiya died on 1^st September 2013.

It was recorded that the girl was examined in the camp held on 8th July 2013 with a view to ensure that she gets treatment by Specialists at the earliest. The civil surgeon’s letter in this case specifically noted that if the Chief Executive Officer had issued orders earlier, the girl Soufiya could have been saved. As the entire expenditure on the surgery and treatment of the sofiya was approved by the Civil Surgeon, only on account of fatal delay in issuing consequential order that the girl died without receiving the required medical treatment.

The HC also observed from the communication dated 3rd August 2013 addressed by the Civil Surgeon, Solapur, to the Chief Executive Officer of Solapur records that not only that the elementary facilities were lacking in the “Vaijanta Shamrao Sawant Charitable Trust's Aditya Hospital” at Vishram Baug, Sangli, but even a Full Time Orthopedic Surgeon was not available in the said hospital. It Was recorded that the said hospital did not not have Pediatric Orthopedic Instruments and there were no facilities of Physiotherapy and Post Operative Rehabilitation in the said hospital. In fact, the said letter recorded that the said Hospital was not capable of treating the children needing orthopedic treatment.

The HC aslo directed the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune, to hold an inquiry into the fact that notwithstanding the communication dated 3rd August 2013 issued by the Civil Surgeon, Solapur, the cases recommended by the Civil Surgeon, Solapur, were referred to Vaijanta Shamrao Sawant Charitable Trust's Aditya Hospital at Vishram Baug, Sangli;

HC also asked The Divisional Commissioner to look into the alleged action of approving payment of amount to the said Vaijanta Shamrao Sawant Charitable Trust's Aditya Hospital at Vishram Baug, Sangli, in relation to the alleged surgery performed on the disabled students.

The divisional commissioner hold inquiry but found and that neither the Civil Surgeon nor the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad was responsible for the delay. After perusing said report HC observed that the correctness of the report needs to be tested and directed the Principal Secretary of the Health Department of the State Government to nominate appropriate higher officer to look into the entire record of the inquiry and to record his own conclusions in the matter after considering the report of the Divisional Commissioner.

This is how administration in Maharashtra works, even after high court observed that soufiyas life could have been saved if she had received right treatment at right place. The divisional commissioner didn’t find any body guilty of criminal negligence. It seems that not only politicians but babus in Maharashtra do not give any heed to poor children rights. Recent chikki scam and soufiya death case are classic examples of it.

Related Stories

To protect fellow officers, Government Officers tend to frustrate the basic intention of RTI -Mumbai High Court

18th anniversary of "Cheat India Movement” Started by Public Servants of Independent India

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website – http://surajya.org

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

Twitter - https://twitter.com/Vijaykumbhar62

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Custodial Deaths Row,Maharashtra Government fails to install CCTVs in Police stations

Recently Bombay High Court pulled Maharashtra Government for not complying its directions to install CCTV Cameras in every corner of the room of the police stations including an interrogation room before 10/09/2014. HC also expressed displeasure over not inviting tenders and making assessment and finding out how many police stations are there and how many CCTV cameras will be required for installation.

The Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State had asked twelve weeks' time as the report from the Home Department on this issue was awaited. HC then had adjourned the case till 24.9.2014. But now as the hearing has been adjourned till 13 November 2014 state government has got some more breathing period.

In its directions HC had asked Maharashtra Government to immediately install and maintain closed circuit television (CCTV) with rotating cameras in every corridor, room and lock up of each Police Station in the state so that every part of the Police Station is covered 24 hours of the day. Compliance report on this order was to be given before 10 September 2014.

Last month on 13 august after it was brought to the notice of the court that there were 333 custodial deaths over a period of 15 years from 1999 to 2013 in Maharashtra and 43 FIRs were filed and 19 charge-sheets were filed, but no police officer has been convicted so far. Bombay High court had passed severe stricture on police. HC was hearing a criminal writ filed by Leonard Xavier Valdaris, father of deceased Agnelo Valdaris who died in the custody of the Wadala Police.

Angelo by profession a driver was arrested with three others by wadala police. It was alleged that in custody police brutally tortured and sexually abused the accused. Later on Angelo was found dead. It was also alleged by Angelo’s father that police claim that Angelo died while escaping from the custody of the police, was well planned and designed to avoid criminal consequences arising out of the action of the accused. It was also submitted that, in fact, version had been given by one of the injured person in which he had in terms stated that one of the police officer had threatened him, that even if he dies during interrogation, he would be shown to have been killed in a railway accident.

Photo Courtesy - ummid.com

While hearing this case HC initially refused to hand over the investigation to CBI, However court ordered CID to file fresh FIR. Then it was alleged by angelo’s father that an attempt had been made to destroy the evidence and fabricate the same in order to protect the original accused, HC passed strictures against CID and handed over the case to CBI.

HC also observed that the manner in which the offence was alleged to had been committed, was gruesome and there was complete lack of sensitivity of the interrogating agency in interrogating the accused. The photographs produced of the injured persons also indicated that they were brutally tortured by the police.

Related Stories

Custodial deaths of 2 youth: Fresh probe ordered

Activists draw up campaign to make police reforms an election issue

Madras high court orders CBI probe into custodial rape case

Custody Deaths in Kerala

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

RTI KATTA is a platform to empower oneself through discussions amongst each other to solve their problems by using Right to Information act, Every Sunday at Chittaranjan Watika, Model Colony,Shivaji nagar, Pune, between 9.30 to 10.30 A.M.

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website - http://www.surajya.org/

https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

https://twitter.com/kvijay14

Wednesday, May 2, 2018

DSK SCAM: HC Postpones hearing on MD & CEO Shirish Kulkarni’s anticipatory bail to 4th may ..

Shirish Deepak Kulkarni's anticipatory bail application case in Bombay High Court is now postponed to 4th May 2018. Shirish is one of the accused in DSK Scam.

Related Stories

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Co Operative Societies Are Bound To Supply Information Under RTI - Bombay HC

Related Stories

Co operative societies Not out Of ambit of RTI

Forming Co Operative society now fundamental right Withstatus of local self Government, under ambit of RTI act

Cooperative societies are created, governed, and controlled by statute.

Thursday, February 9, 2017

Reshma Bhosale’s Candidature is Abuse of Election Procedure

Sunday, October 4, 2015

Custodial death, family obtains information under RTI, files writ, Court orders government to pay compensation

Related Stories

Monday, September 7, 2015

Maharashtra circular on sedition makes politicians and public servants “self proclaimed Government”

Related Stories

Saturday, September 5, 2015

Why is there so much Hue and cry over , Maharashtra Government’s guidelines on sedition charges ?

Monday, August 10, 2015

Government appoints Committee to test correctness of Pune divisional commissioner’s inquiry report in five year old girls death

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Custodial Deaths Row,Maharashtra Government fails to install CCTVs in Police stations