How could this situation have developed?

Sir, – I found the Courier report (November 10) of the abominable treatment of Mr Bashir Hussain to be quite alarming.

His failure to apply for planning consent before erecting a sign and painting the pointing of the stonework at his takeaway was treated by Angus Council planners as a criminal offence, causing him to be reported to the procurator fiscal for prosecution.

Mr Hussain has been put through months of needless worry.

Members of the development standards committee thought the council officials were “using a sledge hammer to crack a nut” – an understatement if ever there was one.

In an effort to appease criticism the planning officials are to meet with the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to identify any weakness in the council’s report and lessons to be learned.

This meeting is not required.

The reason the criminal charges were dropped was stated clearly by the Crown Office in the report in The Courier.

They advised there was insufficient evidence to link the accused with the offence and also a lack of corroboration as regards the offence.

So why was Mr Hussain prosecuted at all?

If I didn’t have personal experience of Angus planning I would, like many others, have suggested a racial motive in Mr Bashir’s prosecution by Angus planners and Forfar procurator fiscal, but I know it’s just the usual incompetence.

Robert Alexander. 39 Barry Road, Carnoustie.

Bashir Hussain outside the Brechin premises at the centre of the prosecution, since abandoned.