You are here: Home » PTI Stories » National » News
Business Standard

HC raps Maha for delay in setting up police complaint panel

Press Trust of India  |  Mumbai 

The today expressed displeasure over the government's failure to set up State Police Complaint Authority Committee despite assurances in the past that it would be functional by October 15.

On May 23 last year, the state had announced appointment of a retired judge to head the state-level authority. It had also given names of two retired additional directors general and two Indian Administrative Services officers to be part of the authority.



While a state-level committee would hear complaints against police officers above the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), district-level committee would hear complaints against policemen below the rank of ACP.

The issue came up before a division bench of justices R V More and Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi while hearing a filed by the father of two boys who have been accused in a rape case.

The claims that the boys have been falsely implicated and that the police are hand in gloves with the complainant.

The sought to know why the petitioner did not approach the committee with his complaint.

Additional Public Prosecutor Mankhuvar Deshmukh informed the that committee is not yet functional.

He said there is certain dispute over salary of the committee members which is causing delay.

"We are hearing this since two years. It has been so long now. It seems like the is not at all interested in establishing the forum (committee)," Justice More said.

The bench posted the matter for further hearing after two weeks and sought to know by when the committee would be functional.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

RECOMMENDED FOR YOU

HC raps Maha for delay in setting up police complaint panel

The Bombay High Court today expressed displeasure over the Maharashtra government's failure to set up State Police Complaint Authority Committee despite assurances in the past that it would be functional by October 15. On May 23 last year, the state had announced appointment of a retired judge to head the state-level authority. It had also given names of two retired additional directors general and two Indian Administrative Services officers to be part of the authority. While a state-level committee would hear complaints against police officers above the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), district-level committee would hear complaints against policemen below the rank of ACP. The issue came up before a division bench of justices R V More and Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi while hearing a petition filed by the father of two boys who have been accused in a rape case. The petition claims that the boys have been falsely implicated and that the police are hand in gloves with the ... The today expressed displeasure over the government's failure to set up State Police Complaint Authority Committee despite assurances in the past that it would be functional by October 15.

On May 23 last year, the state had announced appointment of a retired judge to head the state-level authority. It had also given names of two retired additional directors general and two Indian Administrative Services officers to be part of the authority.

While a state-level committee would hear complaints against police officers above the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), district-level committee would hear complaints against policemen below the rank of ACP.

The issue came up before a division bench of justices R V More and Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi while hearing a filed by the father of two boys who have been accused in a rape case.

The claims that the boys have been falsely implicated and that the police are hand in gloves with the complainant.

The sought to know why the petitioner did not approach the committee with his complaint.

Additional Public Prosecutor Mankhuvar Deshmukh informed the that committee is not yet functional.

He said there is certain dispute over salary of the committee members which is causing delay.

"We are hearing this since two years. It has been so long now. It seems like the is not at all interested in establishing the forum (committee)," Justice More said.

The bench posted the matter for further hearing after two weeks and sought to know by when the committee would be functional.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

image
Business Standard
177 22

HC raps Maha for delay in setting up police complaint panel

The today expressed displeasure over the government's failure to set up State Police Complaint Authority Committee despite assurances in the past that it would be functional by October 15.

On May 23 last year, the state had announced appointment of a retired judge to head the state-level authority. It had also given names of two retired additional directors general and two Indian Administrative Services officers to be part of the authority.

While a state-level committee would hear complaints against police officers above the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), district-level committee would hear complaints against policemen below the rank of ACP.

The issue came up before a division bench of justices R V More and Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi while hearing a filed by the father of two boys who have been accused in a rape case.

The claims that the boys have been falsely implicated and that the police are hand in gloves with the complainant.

The sought to know why the petitioner did not approach the committee with his complaint.

Additional Public Prosecutor Mankhuvar Deshmukh informed the that committee is not yet functional.

He said there is certain dispute over salary of the committee members which is causing delay.

"We are hearing this since two years. It has been so long now. It seems like the is not at all interested in establishing the forum (committee)," Justice More said.

The bench posted the matter for further hearing after two weeks and sought to know by when the committee would be functional.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

image
Business Standard
177 22