HC order violated by summoning suspect to police stn: Activist to court
An activist has submitted a letter to the 41st Magistrate court at Dadar to conduct a magisterial inquiry in the death of 17-year-old Sachin Ravindra Jaiswar since no appropriate action has been taken against Dharavi Police so far. The family of Sachin has alleged that the police had illegally detained and tortured Sachin inside a toilet from July 13 midnight until 10.30pm on July 14.
The vice-president of Mumbai Railway Pravasi Sangh, Radheshyam Sharma, submitted the letter on July 25. The matter has been forwarded to the principal judge of the city and civil sessions court and the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Esplanade court.
According to Sharma, “We have dispatched the letter to the magistrate court at Dadar, the city and civil sessions court and the Esplanade court. It is clear that Dharavi Police personnel, without giving any notice in writing and without following the guidelines issued by Mumbai Police and Maharashtra Police, had illegally detained Jaiswar. The higherranked officials of the rank of DCP and above failed to see that the police had not followed
the procedure in letter and spirit, as the per the circular dated August 16, 2008.”
A direction had been issued by the Bombay High Court on August 16, 2008, which directs all police officers that when they need a person to be examined as a witness or as a suspect, they shall send a notice in writing to the said person. The circular further states that if the directions are not complied with, the officers concerned would be dealt with in accordance with the law and the court may also take an inference of illegally detaining the person who was not called by a written notice. The public prosecutor also stated that the Director General of Police, Maharashtra State, has also issued a similar circular on the same day.
According to the High Court order, if the magistrate finds that any person has been unlawfully detained, he shall report the matter to the Sessions Judge, who shall take appropriate action in the matter.
The order was passed after a petitioner was kept in custody without any authority of law from March 9, 2008 to March 12, 2008 by the Antop Hill police station. He was not even produced before the magistrate and was allowed to go home after March 12, 2008. After making enquiries, it was found that the petitioner was not involved in the offence. The court observed that the respondents were not able to show any notice having served on the petitioner for appearance at the police station for being questioned.
The court remarked that the practice was going on even after 125 years of the Code of Criminal Procedure being in force, which does not give power to any police officer to call anybody to the police station without informing him in writing that he is required at the police station unless such person is to be arrested in a case disclosing commission of a cognisable offence.