A GUIDE TO SURVIVING IPC It's A very useful guide for all the Indo Pak Peoples for knowing there rights in IPC Or PPc

We should not think that we are men and women. But only that we are human beings, born to cherish and to help one another. -Swami Ranganathananda All the strength and succor you want is within you. Do not be afraid. -Swami Vivekananda The quality of a nation's civilization can be largely measured by the methods it uses in the enforcement of criminal law. -The Supreme Court Of India, Joginder Kumar Vs State Of U.P., 1994 The National Police Commission in its Third Report referring to the quality of arrests by the police in India mentioned power of arrest as one of the chief sources of corruption in the police. -The Supreme Court Of India, Joginder Kumar Vs State Of U.P., 1994 No arrest can be made because it is lawful for the police officer to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing. The justification for the exercise of it is quite another. The police officer must be able to justify the arrest apart from his power to do so. Arrest and detention in police lock-up of a person can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent for a police officer in the interest of protection of the constitutional rights of a citizen and perhaps in his own interest that no arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bona fides of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the person's complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. -The Supreme Court Of India, Joginder Kumar Vs State Of U.P., 1994 The accused in these cases might have been on bail - but the injustice of pendency of trial for long periods is the uncertainty and the concomitant anxiety suffered by the under-trial. The under-trial is inhibited in making future plans for his life or executing present ones due to the uncertainty which pendency of trial brings. His confidence starts to erode and at the end of the trial, even if he is honorably acquitted, the scars of the long trial remain. He feels condemned despite the acquittal. -The Supreme Court On The Right To A Speedy Trial Once a complaint is lodged under Sections 498A/406 IPC whether there are vague, unspecific or exaggerate allegations or there is no evidence of any physical or mental harm or injury inflicted upon woman that is likely to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health, it comes as an easy tool in the hands of Police and agencies like Crime Against Women Cell to hound them with the threat of arrest making them run here and there and force them to hide at their friends or relatives houses till they get anticipatory bail as the offence has been made cognizable and non-bailable. Thousands of such complaints and cases are pending and are being lodged day in and day out. -Justice JD Kapoor, Delhi High Court Torture is not merely physical, there may be mental torture and psychological torture calculated to create fright and submission to the demands or commands. When the threats proceed from a person in Authority and that too by a police officer the mental torture caused by it is even more grave. -The Supreme Court Of India, Arvinder Singh Bagga v. State of U.P, 1994 Torture and police brutality are endemic in India. -Supreme Court Lawyer And Architect Of The Indian DV Act, Indira Jaising, In A London Court, 1999 I object to this exploitation of the law. It is wrong to misuse the law. The law is for those who need it. -Union Minister For WCD, Renuka Chaudhary, on the Arjun Singh 498A episode The idea should be to see how the police system works, the concerned official out there should not lodge an FIR and arrest the groom and his side before investigating. These kind of shortcuts are mainly tainting the image of the prevailing law. The way uncles, aunts are also humiliated is not fair, we agree that they should not be booked until a full-proof investigation is carried out. Instead of amending the law we should try to improve our police system and investigating procedure. -Spokesperson Of The NCW, 14 /Jan /2007, TOI Article: “NRIs cry foul over IPC 498A, dowry law” Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 1/22 11/9/07 INTRODUCTION People don’t know what Section 498A of the IPC is nor do they know what to do when a 498A case is registered against them. I hope to shed some light on what this law is really about, the effects it will have on you and your family and how to survive this ordeal. This document is divided into three chapters. The first chapter gives you an overview and attempts to educate you about your rights and some applicable laws. The second chapter gives you an idea about what you can expect to face once you get caught up in the Indian criminal justice system. The third chapter details what you can do to fight this menace and also gives you some general information. This document is best read on a computer connected to the Internet due to the numerous links to websites that are embedded in the document. However, most of the content and supporting material is summarized here. There are two classes of Indian citizens, the privileged and the ordinary. The privileged will never get into a situation like this, as the laws don’t apply to them. The Arjun Singh 498A case is a prime example. Though an accused in a criminal case, he is still a Union Minister whereas thousands of govt employees have lost their jobs or find themselves under suspension due to an unsubstantiated allegation. This document is meant for the not so privileged, the law-abiding citizens who have no idea about what it means to get entangled in a criminal case on the basis of an allegation. Man or woman, regardless of age or marital status, if you have an estranged `Bahu’ (daughter in law) in your family, whether she is living/lived/never lived with you; you can be jailed under Section 498A of the IPC, based on her complaint in the police station. The objective of the ‘Bahu’ and her parents is to subject you and your family to an ordeal designed to break your will and ensure that you give in to their demands. This law targets families who belong to the middle and upper middle classes of society and NRIs, as these segments of society are vulnerable to legalized extortion by corrupt agencies of the government. There is no way to avoid a 498A from being filed, unless you are very well connected or somehow manage to make her realize that it is not in her long term interest to do so. However, you will win if you choose to fight. A typical case will go on for 3 to 7 years. Be prepared to lose some of your most productive years professionally. Be prepared to lose your hair. Be prepared to spend money and lots of it. Be prepared to shed a lot of tears. Above all, be prepared to watch your parents and siblings suffer, all on account of the abuse of this idiotic law. To fight a 498A, you will need patience, courage, knowledge about the laws, your fundamental rights, information about how others have fought their cases, a clear idea about what they want from you, and you need to develop the ability to think like a crook. Things become easier of you are well connected/develop connections with the bureaucracy. Patience and the ability to think clearly and unemotionally are the most important qualities needed. If you are innocent, you will eventually prevail. I assure you of this. If you apprehend being 498A’d, don’t just stand there like a deer caught in the headlights. From the people you talk to and from the online portals you visit, you will learn that this is a criminal law to combat domestic violence and dowry harassment etc, etc, etc. I’ll ignore this and cut to the chase. In its present form, 498a is an extortion racket In legal terms, 498A is an offence, which is: • Cognizable: Offences are divided into cognizable and non-cognizable. By law, the police are duty bound to register and investigate a cognizable offence. 498A is a cognizable offence. • Non-Bailable: There are two kinds of offences, bailable and non-bailable. 498A is non bailable. This means that the magistrate has the power to refuse bail and remand you to judicial or police custody. • Non-Compoundable: A non-compoundable case, e.g. Rape, 498A etc, cannot be withdrawn by the petitioner. The exception is in the state of Andhra Pradesh, where 498A was made compoundable. In actual terms, 498A is an offence, which is: • Cognizable: The police will register a 498A case since it is required by law, but they don’t investigate but go on to arrest people because of the money to be made in bribes from both sides in a 498A case. Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 2/22 11/9/07 • Non-Bailable: Since bail is at the discretion of the magistrate, all sorts of games will be played to have families locked up while negotiations go on to settle the case. This may happen in cases where the magistrates are allegedly corrupt or, the public prosecutor and the cops are in cahoots. • Non-Compoundable: Though 498A is non compoundable, the courts are allowing the withdrawal of the case when the parties agree to reconcile or settle case. In real terms, if you pay up, the case goes away. If you don’t you’ll get stuck with a criminal case that will go on for years. The other characteristics of this extortion racket are: • It is a law that fosters corruption and enables govt agencies like the police to violate Fundamental Rights. • It plays a role in gender based vote bank politics. • It denies justice to the real victims of dowry harassment. • It exposes innocent families to the evils of the corrupt Indian criminal justice system. • This is a law poisoning the lower judiciary by exposing it to corruption. • Above all, this is a gamble bound to fail if the falsely accused choose to fight back. The sooner you realize what this law is about, the faster you will be able to take the first steps to fight this extortion racket. It will take years, but you will prevail. Each case is unique. But they all have a common thread running through them. I have outlined the high level scenario, as every case is unique and has a story line of its’ own. I concede that my narrative is simplistic, but the outlines apply in most cases. This is not legal advice but more of a set of observations, opinions and suggestions. The intent is not slander or defame any person or institution, but to raise awareness about this pernicious law so that citizens can defend themselves. When taking action, please do so, after seeking the advice of your lawyer. I am assuming that you belong to the middle/upper middle class, and there is marital discord. Your parents may have retired or are close to retiring. You may or may not be part of an extended family living under the same roof. Your spouse may have warned you that she will file a 498A against you for some reason or the other. You or your parents may have assets in some form or another such as cash, salary, property etc. The family of your spouse may be politically connected. If you have kids, you will have to deal with the additional agony of watching them being treated as pawns in this game. I have settled on 498A Wives as the best way to refer to women who abuse Section 498A of the IPC. Motives And Instigators: Let’s start with the motives and instigators: • Money: The greatest of motivators. A 498A can lead to great terms for a fat cash settlement, or help her dad or sibling in their ventures, etc, etc. • Vengeance: Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. She will have her revenge and your family will collectively bear the brunt of it. The 498A Wives have a soft corner for your mother and your sister (s). Prepare your mom and sister(s) for special treatment. They may very well see the inside of a prison. • Guilt: She’s done something wrong, may have committed adultery and got caught in the act. She wants to cover it up with a dowry harassment case to garner sympathy and to provide cover for her guilt. It also puts her in a good position to negotiate a fat settlement and gain custody of kids, if kids are involved. 498A will be filed when paternity is in question. Don’t count on DNA evidence, as the courts are reluctant to allow it. Indian law is still ruled by the evidence act from 1872. • She Is Just Not Into You: I’m sorry to hurt your pride, but she just doesn’t like you and wants to get out of the marriage. The 498A is a convenient tool to do so. • She Is A Control Freak: She wants to control you in every possible way. She may also want you to not support your parents and siblings in any fashion regardless of your ability to do so. She may want you to throw your parents out of your/their house. Her goal is to gain control of all aspects of your life, including finances and to break the bonds and responsibilities that tie you to your family. Her failure to do so will result in a 498A. Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 3/22 11/9/07 • To Marry The Boyfriend: This is a new trend whereby she will file a 498A just to force you into settling the divorce with a chunk of cash and then go on to marry her boyfriend. They will use your cash to set up their “Chota Sa Ghar”, or their “Premiyon Ka Mahal” if the settlement is large enough. In most cases, the members of her family are the instigators. If her mother was the instigator, you’ve possibly married into a family where the mother is a dominatrix. The woman you married thinks that you should be under her control, because her mother wears the pants in her house. She will file the 498A in retaliation for her failure to dominate you. If her father is the instigator, the motivation is your money. This is a much easier case to handle. If the case backfires, he will have a 498A-filing daughter on his hands and marrying her off the second time round will be expensive. Potential matrimonial matches are always wary of these filers of 498A cases. If this situation applies to your case, once you withstand the initial onslaught and don’t give in to the threats and extortion, they will approach you for a compromise. 498A is the perfect tool for extortion and/or to wreak vengeance on you and your family. The main ingredients that go into making it an extortion racket are: • The involvement of the corrupt, Indian police force in a domestic dispute. • The involvement of the overburdened and unregulated lower courts and the convoluted and lengthy Indian justice delivery system. • The non-enforcement of penalties (Section 182) for filing frivolous cases or for perjury. • Political/police influence from the other side. If this is a factor in your case, I kid you not; you are in for an ordeal that will require extra doses of fortitude, courage and patience to overcome. All these factors will be used to leverage money out of you or subject you and your family to the kind of harassment that can only be defined as torture. It is no wonder that the Supreme Court (Sushil Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India Writ petition(C) no.141 of 2005) has condemned 498A as “Legal Terrorism”, though ruling 498A constitutional. Preparations: A 498A case does not happen overnight, signs begin to occur much before the FIR is filed. If you are being threatened with a 498A, here are a few things you can do: • Begin to document daily events as away to gather evidence, in the form of letters, photos, and witnesses, to prepare for the defense. • Contact senior police officers such as the SP/DIG/IG/DGP and give them in writing that you fear that a 498A will be filed against you. Make sure that you keep copies of the letters and also ensure that they have been stamped. These contacts can save you from arbitrary arrest especially when you show the letters written to senior officers to the officers in the police station for they will realize that the matter will go to the higher ups. • Apply for anticipatory bail. Get it for all members of your family. Though it may cost you upfront, this cost is trifling when compared to the amount you may need to spend in the event of an arrest. • This is a criminal case; get a criminal lawyer with a good reputation, not a divorce lawyer. Integrity of the lawyer is of paramount importance. Some lawyers have been selling out their clients in 498A cases. • Talk to people. Call SIF volunteers. Get on the Internet and research. • Have cash handy on you at all times. Rs 50,000.00 should be a minimum. • If you don’t get anticipatory bail, move fast and get 3 applications ready for regular bail, one for the lower court, district court and the High Court of your state. This will be your plan B. Plan B needs to be activated in the event of an arrest and bail being denied by the lower courts. • It is very important that you talk to people who have been through this so that you don’t repeat the mistakes made by others. • Mental Preparation. You need to start treating your spouse like a formidable adversary. Any weakness on your side in dealing with your spouse with softness will cost you. Don’t feel responsible for her. This is a necessary ingredient if you want to succeed in this fight. The moment she files a 498A against you, the balance of power shifts decisively in her favor. She is no longer a “weak” woman, an “Abala Nari”, but an avenging angel who Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 4/22 11/9/07 has various corrupt branches of the government working on her side, all wanting to extort their pound of flesh from you. Getting an anticipatory bail should be a priority. This is your first and last line of defense if you want to avoid being jailed. If you are out on AB, you’ve pretty much won the case as you’ve avoided the terror that the other side would’ve unleashed on you, by using the muscle of the Indian criminal justice system. You can fight a 498A effectively, if you are informed about basic terms, your basic rights and what awaits you once you get entangled in the case. Some Basic Terms: These are some of the terms you will hear all the time. You need to understand these terms. • FIR: is the First Information Report. It is the information recorded by the police officer on duty, given either by the aggrieved person or any other person about the commission of an alleged cognizable offence. On the basis of the F.I.R. the police commences its investigation. If the officer in charge refuses to record the information, the information may be sent in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police who, if satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him. The police are required to register every cognizable offence, such as 498A, by law. • Investigation: An “investigation” means search for material and facts in order to find out whether or not an offence has been committed. In criminal proceedings, once a Police Officer receives information about the commission of a cognizable offence, he is entitled to start investigation of the matter. Investigation includes all the proceedings of collection of evidence conducted by a police officer or by any person who is authorized by the Magistrate in his behalf. The following information is from the website of the AP CID. • No male under the age of fifteen years or woman shall be required to attend at any place other than where they reside. • The police officer shall orally examine the person supposed to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case. • A person is not bound to answer those questions, which would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge or to a penalty or forfeiture. • No statement made by any person to a police officer in the course of investigation in writing shall be signed by the person making it. • No police officer shall prevent any person from making in the course of any investigation any statement, which he may be disposed to make of his own freewill. • Any police officer making an investigation may, by order in writing ask any person being within the local limits of his own or adjoining police station to come to the police station for questioning and it is the duty of the person called to report on the specified time and place. • Such person is bound to answer truly all questions relating to the case put to him by the officer. No police officer or other person shall offer or make any such inducement, threat or promise to th • e person being questioned. sheet: • Charge When a Police officer gives a Police report under section 173 Cr.P.C. recommending prosecution, it is called a charge sheet. After questioning the accused and hearing the arguments, the magistrate frames charges on the accused for which he is tried. Arrest: • A person is considered to be under arrest if he or she is confined or kept in a police station or his movements are restricted to within the precincts of the police station. Anticipatory Bail: Anticipatory bail is a direction by a court of law t • o release a person on bail, issued even before the person is arrested. Bail: Bail is money that is pu • t up for the suspect to allow him or her to remain free until the completion of the case. Bail basically creates a financial incentive for a suspect to appear in court. Failure to do so results in the loss of your bail money; you’ll also get a warrant for your arrest, and you can add bail jumping to your criminal charge too. to understand the laws, judgmen Read on ts and your rights that will help you in fighting this extortion racket. Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 5/22 11/9/07 CHAPTER I The Police, The Laws And Your Rights: Until your case ends up in the trial court, the police will be your primary adversary. This is what the SSP of Haridwar, Abhinav Kumar IPS, has to say about the Indian Police force (http://tinyurl.com/2zev8w): “Let me start with the police. They remain primarily an instrument of asserting state authority against whosoever is perceived by the Leviathan to be the most immediate threat. In return for servility and acceptance of the beast’s priorities, they are permitted to prey on the weakest and most helpless sections of society. A police station in India is a sordid monument to the worst in human nature. The squalor, the pressures, the often thankless nature of police work would all be bearable if one felt that the police were genuinely enabled to enforce the law and protect the weak and helpless.” He uses the term leviathan; I would have used the phrase, “reigning political establishment”. I hope you now understand the nature of the Indian police force. You will be able to deal with them if you know your fundamental rights, the laws and judgments governing the Indian police and are informed about the process of Indian criminal justice. Legal systems all over the world have been based upon the common maxim of “ignorantia juris non excusat”, which means that ignorance of the law is no excuse. The principle, had first originated in the Code of Justinian the great centuries ago. By the time you are done reading this section, you will know more about your rights and the limitations on the powers of the police than the police themselves. When the police feign ignorance of the laws, you should be telling the police, “ignorantia juris non excusat”. The Supreme Court Of India is the final arbiter over and interpreter, of all laws. The interpretation of laws is done through judgments. Here are some Supreme Court judgments that detail your Fundamental Rights and some other laws that will be useful in fighting your 498A. The Doctrine Of Binding Precedent: The Supreme Court of India (UNION OF INDIA & ANR.Vs RAGHUBIR SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS.DATE OF JUDGMENT 16/05/1989) says that Article 142 of the Constitution declares that any order of the Supreme Court is enforceable throughout the territory of India and article 144 mandates that all civil and judicial authorities shall act in aid of the Supreme Court. Here is an excerpt from this judgment: “The doctrine of binding precedent has the merit promoting a certainty and consistency in judicial decisions, and enables an organic development of the law, besides providing assurance to the individual as to the consequence of transaction forming part of his daily affairs. And, therefore, the need for a clear and consistent enunciation of legal principle in the decisions of a Court.” This implies that all judgments, except for those marked for exception, passed by the Supreme Court, are considered to be the law of the land and all branches of the government need to abide by them. The Right To Due Process: The Constitution Of India has given its citizens certain Fundamental Rights. A combination of these basic rights constitutes the right to due process. Due process is the idea that laws and legal proceedings must be fair and in accordance with the established lawful procedure. The Constitution guarantees that no government agency can violate these basic rights of a citizen. The Supreme Court (E.g.: Citizen for Democracy through its, president Vs. State of Assam & Others: 1996 Cr.L.J. 3247) has repeatedly warned that: “Any violation of any of the directions issued by us by any rank of police in the country or member of the jail establishment shall be summarily punishable under the Contempt of Courts Act apart from other penal consequences under law (emphasis supplied)”. Some of these constitutionally bestowed basic rights are: • Article 14. Equality before law: The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the law within the territory of India. Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 6/22 11/9/07 • Article 20. Protection in respect of offenses: onvicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of f the commission of the conviction for 1. No person shall be c the commission of the act charged as an offence, not be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time o offence. 2. No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once. 3. No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. • Article 21. Protection of life and personal liberty: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. • Article 22. Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases: formed, as soon as may be defended 1. No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being in be denied the right to consult, and to be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he by, a legal practitioner of his choice. 2. Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of 24 hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate. • Article 32. Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part: 1. The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this part is guaranteed. 2. The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part. e the right to life and liberty consistently. Among all these rights, the police violat If your fundamental rights are violated, you have the right to: • Go straight to the High Court or even the Supreme Court of India. • The Right to approach the Supreme Court in case of a violation is a fundamental right. This link (http://tinyurl.com/24gmex) provides some details on how to approach the Supreme Court Legal t Legal Services Committee provides free legal service, though conditions from unlawful detention of any person including himself. ubjects, whether free or fettered - most notably the right of Habeas Corpus, strument for the safeguarding the freedom of an individual against arbi On Gha epeated inquiries over a period of 4 days not producing any ustodial murder, filed a writ of Habeas Corpus to the Suprem honorable co t satisfied with a wishy-washy explanation to the question of why a person was detained for 5 days, the court swung into action and this landmark judgment is the result. Services Committee. The Supreme Cour apply. The Magna Carta, Habeas Corpus And The Powers Of The Police To Arrest A Citizen: A classic example of Habeas Corpus is the Supreme Court judgment Joginder Kumar Vs. State Of U.P. 25/04/1994. This landmark judgment of the Supreme Court defined the powers of the police to arrest a citizen. In order to truly understand this judgment and the meaning of Habeas Corpus, a short history lesson is needed. Habeas Corpus (Latin:”We command that you have the body”) is the name of a legal action, or writ, through which a person can seek relief The Magna Carta was originally issued in 1215 and was written because of disagreements among Pope Innocent III, King John and the English barons, about the rights of the King. Magna Carta required the king to renounce certain rights, respect certain legal procedures and accept that his will could be bound by the law. It explicitly protected certain rights of the king's s meaning that they had rights against unlawful imprisonment. Since then, in every civilized nation, the writ of Habeas Corpus has been an important in trary govt action. 7/Jan/1994, a 28 year old young man from UP, with an LLB degree, Joginder Kumar, was detained by the ziabad police for a period of 5 days. Upon r answers from the police, the frantic relatives, fearing c e Court under article 32 of the Constitution. By the 5th day, the SSP (4th respondent) appeared before the urt and submitted that Joginder Kumar was released. No Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 7/22 11/9/07 The former Chief Justice Of India, M.N. Venkatachalliah, in this landmark judgment (JOGINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE applies in the ca OF U.P, 25/04/1994), defined the powers of the police to arrest a person. This judgment especially se of a cognizable offence such as 498A. He stated that: “No arrest can be made because it is lawful for the police officer to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing ification for the exercise of it is quite another. The police officer must be able to justify the arres se incalculable . The just t apart from his power to do so. Arrest and detention in police lock-up of a person cau harm to r on a mere the reputation and self–esteem of a person. No arrest can be made in a routine manne all tio ega n of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent for a police officer in the interest perhaps in his own interest that no arrest of protection of the constitutional rights of a citizen and sh d b ation as to the genuineness and oul e made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investig bona fides of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the person’s complicity and even so as to the need to effect arre There are signifi e fulfilled for an arrest. These are: st. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. cant other requirements that need to b 1. The case involves a grave offence like murder, dacoity, robbery, rape etc., and it is necessary to arrest the accused and bring his movements under restraint to infuse confidence among the terror stricken victims. 2. The accused is likely to abscond and evade the processes of law. 3. The acc unless his movements are used is given to violent behavior and is likely to commit further offences brought under restraint. 4. The accused is a habitual offender and unless kept in custody he is likely to commit similar offences again. It tmental instructions that a police officer making an would be desirable to insist through depar arre h st s ould also record in the case diary the reasons for making the arrest, thereby clarifying his conform In yet another j 0, Ajeet Singh alias , while serving as a judge on the on has reason to offence upon a police report and shall proceed in person, or shall depute one of his subordinate l order, prescribe ity to the specified guidelines. udgment dated 22.8.2004 (Criminal Misc.Writ Petition No.4861 of 200 Muraha Vs. State of U.P. and others), Supreme Court Justice Markandeya Katju Allahabad High Court, had the following to say: "157. Procedure for investigation – (1) If, from information received or otherwise, an officer in charge of a police stati suspect the commission of an offence which he is empowered under section 156 to investigate, he shall forthwith send a report of the same to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such officer not being below such rank as the State Government may, by general or specia in this behalf to proceed, to the spot to investigate the facts and circumstances of the case and if necessary to take measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender." The above provision clearly shows that it is not necessary to arrest in every case wherever a FIR of cognizable offence has been registered. No doubt investigation has to be made in every case where a cognizable offence is disclosed but in our opinion investigation does not necessarily include arrest. Often the investigation can be done without arresting a person, and this legal position becomes clear from section 157(1) of the Cr.P.C. because that provision states that the Police Officer has to investigate the case, and, if necessary, to take measures for the arrest of the offender. The use of words ' if necessary' clearly indicates that the Police Officer does not have to arrest in every case wherever FIR has been lodged and this position has been clarified in Joginder Kumar's case (supra). In our country unfortunately whenever an FIR of a cognizable offence is lodged the police immediately goes to arrest the accused. This practice in our opinion is illegal as it is against the decision of the Supreme Court in Joginder Kumar's case, and it is also in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution as well as section 157 (1) Cr.P.C. No doubt section 157(1) Cr.P.C. gives a police officer discretion to arrest or not, but this discretion cannot be exercised arbitrarily and it must be exercised in accordance with the principles laid down in Joginder Kumar's case (supra).” Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 8/22 11/9/07 The police will say that 498A is a cognizable offence. By cognizable, it means they have to REGISTER an FIR and INVESTIGATE, not arrest the accused immediately. Think about it. If a king has been stripped of his power r criminal record, can fall into any of the cate To Cou and The refo ave been granted wide disc If they d may e abeas Corpus, compensation for illegal dete Read on r safeguards the hon’ble courts of the country have set in place to protect you from Procedu The Sup to arrest without cause 800 years ago, how can the police in a democracy claim to have that power? Keeping these judgments in mind, I am interested in seeing how a grandmother or a grandfather, young nieces and nephews, married and unmarried sisters and parents, without a prio gories described by Justice M.N. Venkatachalliah. summarize, the police have discretionary powers to arrest, but they need to justify the arrest and Supreme rt and High Courts judgments have established that some investigation must be done before an arrest is made even then, only if necessary. Late Justice AN Mulla (A former Judge of the Allahabad HC and author of the Mulla Committee on prison rm) said: “I say it with all sense of responsibility that there is not a single lawless group in the whole country whose record of crime is anywhere near the record of that organized unit which is known as the Indian Police Force.” Keeping the words of Justice AN Mulla in mind, and knowing that the police h retionary powers to arrest, be prepared for an arrest by the police. o arrest you, they need to respect your rights and treat you professionally and with courtesy. Later on, you se k redress in the form of contempt of court, writ mandamus, H ntion, etc. to understand what othe the excesses of the police. res To Be Followed Upon The Arrest Of A Person: reme Court (D.K. Basu Vs State of W.B: (1997) 1 SCC 426) directed all state agencies to follow these res upon arresting a person. This judg procedu ment is a landmark judgment and is sometimes referred to as the Miranda Rights Of India. It defines the rights of detainees and the procedures the police need to follow upon affecting an arrest. This judgment came into being due to the custodial deaths happening all over the country (http://tinyurl.com/2b8rvb). This judgment holds any officer at any rank to be in contempt of court if these dire “It detentio 1. The accu poli 2. Tha 3. 4. ctions are disobeyed. Here are the directions from the Supreme Court: is, therefore appropriate to issue the following requirements to be followed in all cases of arrest or n till legal provisions are made in that behalf as preventive measures: police personnel carrying out the arrest and handling the interrogation of the arrestee should bear rate, visible and clear identification and name tags with their designations. The particulars of all such ce personnel who handle interrogation of the arrestee must be recorded in a register. t the police officer carrying out the arrest of the arrestee shall prepare a memo of arrest at the time of st and such memo shall be attested by at least one witness, who may either b arre e a member of the family of the arrestee or a respectable person of the locality from where the arrest is made it shall also be countersigned by the arrestee and shall contain the time and date of arrest. A person who has been arrested or detained and is being held in custody in a police station or interrogation centre or other lock-up, shall be entitled to have one friend or relative or other person known to him or having interest in his welfare being informed, as soon as practicable, that he has been arrested and is being detained at the particular place, unless the attesting witness of the memo of arrest is himself such a friend or a relative of the arrestee. The time, place of arrest and venue of custody of an arrestee must be notified by the police where the next friend or relative of the arrestee lives outside the district or town through the Legal Aid Organization in the District and the police station of the area concerned telegraphically within a period of 8 to 12 hours after the arrest. The person arrested must be made aware as soon as he is out under arrest or is detained. Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 9/22 11/9/07 5. An entry must be made in the diary at the place of detention regarding the arrest of the person which shall also disclose the name of the next friend of the person who has been informed of the arrest and the names and particulars of the police officials in whose custody the arrestee is. 6. The arrestee should, where he so requests, to be also examined at the time of his arrest and major and minor injuries, if any present on his/her body, must be recorded at that time. The “inspection Memo” must be signed both by the arrestee and the police officer effecting the arrest and its copy provided to the doctor on the panel of approved doctors appointed by Director, Health Services and districts as well. rrestee may be permitted to meet his lawyer during interrogation, though not throughout the d State head quarters, where information cuous notice board. arrestee. 7. The arrestee should be subjected to medical examination by a trained doctor every 48 hours during his detention in custody by a of the State or Union Territory concerned. Director, Health Services should prepare such a panel for all tehsils 8. Copies of all the documents including the memo of arrest, referred to above should be sent to the Illaqa Magistrate for his record. 9. The a interrogation. 10. A police control room should be provided at all district an regarding the arrest and the place of custody of the arrestee shall be communicated by the officer causing the arrest, within 12 hours of effecting the arrest and at the police control room it should be displayed on a conspi Failure to comply with the requirements herein above mentioned shall apart from rendering the official concerned liable for departmental action, also render him liable to be punished for contempt of court and the proceedings for contempt of court may be instituted in any High Court of the country, having territorial jurisdiction over the matter.” The Right To Bail: In the context of 498A, I am quoting Sushil Kumar Singh in providing an explanation of bail: “Section 437 of the Code provides for release on bail in cases of non-bailable offences (498A). In such cases, bail is not a matter of right. Court has sufficient discretion to deny or to grant bail. First Schedule to the Code provides the list of bailable and non-bailable offences.” Her Pro ovides guidelines for releasing a pers “Per und t judicially, with disc libe by l The “Fix and Here is Punjab can apply for AB even after the FIR is filed, but not if the “35 e is an excerpt of a Supreme Court judgment (Krishna Iyer, J. in Narasimhulu and Others v Public secutor, High Court of A.P., AIR 1978 SUPREME COURT 429.) that pr on on bail: sonal liberty, deprived when bail is refused, is too precious a value of our constitutional system recognized er Article 21 that the crucial power to negate it is a great trust exercisable, not casually bu lively concern for the cost to the individual and the community. To glamorize impressionistic orders as retionary may, on occasions, make a litigative gamble decisive of a fundamental right. After all, personal rty of an accused or convict is fundamental, suffering lawful eclipse only in terms of ‘procedure established aw’. The last four words of Article 21 are the life of that human right." Supreme Court also said that (Moti Ram and Others v State of M.P. (AIR 1978 SC 1594)): ing an excessively high amount of bond, keeping in consideration the facts and circumstances of the case economic condition of the accused, violates the constitutional norms.” an explanation of Anticipatory bail given by the Supreme Court (Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v The State of AIR 1980 SUPREME COURT 1632). A person person has been arrested. Read the excerpts to get an understanding of AB: . Section 438 (1) of the Code lays down a condition, which has to be satisfied before anticipatory bail can be granted. The applicant must show that he has "reason to believe' that he may be arrested for a non-bailable offe arre e founded on reasonable grounds. nce. The use of the expression "reason to believe" shows that the belief that the applicant may be so sted must b Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 10/22 11/9/07 Thirdly, the filing of a First Information Report is not a condition precedent to the exercise of the power under S. 438. The imminence of a likely arrest founded on a reasonable belief can be shown to exist even if an FIR is not yet file. Fourthly, anticipatory bail can be granted even after in FIR is filed, so long as the applicant has not been arrested. After arrest, the accused must seek his remedy under S. 437 or Section 439 of the Code, if he wants to be rele il in respect of the offence or offences for which he is arrested.” The The Su defined exce Ma The Thi (Na ir 1978 Sc 1025). The background of this story is that Nandini Satpathy - former Chief Minister of Orissa - against whom a case had been registered under the Prevention of Corruption on t she the ng, irrespective incr evid seve ased on ba Definition Of An Arrest: preme Court (Kultej Singh Vs. Circle Inspector of Police & others: 1992 Cr.L.J 1173 (Karnataka)) has an arrest as: “From a reading of sub-section (1) of Section 46 of the Cr.P.C. If a person is confined or kept in the police station or his movements are restricted within the precincts of a police station, it would undoubtedly be a case rrest. In the instant case, of a the FIR specifically states that Hardeep Singh was kept in the police station from the morning of 27.09.1990. Section 57 of the Cr.P.C provides that no police officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable and such period shall not in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under Section 167, ed twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the gistrate’s court. Thus respondents 1 and 2 were required to produce Hardeep Singh within 24 hrs from time he was kept in the police s the tation as Savanur.” Right Against Self Incrimination: s right is conferred by article 20 of The Constitution and this right was upheld by the Supreme Court ndini Satpathy V P.L Dani A Act, was asked to appear before the Deputy Superintendent of Police [Vigilance] for questioning. The police wanted to interrogate her by giving her a string of questions in writing. She refused to answer the questionnaire, he grounds that it was a violation of her fundamental right against self-incrimination. The police insisted that must answer their questions and booked her under Section 179 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which cribes punishment for refusing to answer any question ask pres ed by a public servant authorized to ask that question. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether Nandini Satpathy had a right to silence and whether people can refuse to answer questions during investigation that would point towards their guilt. The Supreme Court issued following directives in the resulting judgments: 1. An accused person cannot be coerced or influenced into giving a statement pointing to her/his guilt. 2. The accused person must be informed of her/his right to remain silent and also of the right against self incrimination. 3. The person being interrogated has the right to have a lawyer by her/his side if she/he so wishes. 4. An accused person must be informed of the right to consult a lawyer at the time of questioni of the fact whether s/he is under arrest or in detention. 5. Women should not be summoned to the police station for questioning in breach of Section 160 (1) CrPC. Children below 15 and women should not be summoned to the police station or to any other place by an investigating officer. They should only be questioned at their place of residence. An essential element of a fair trial is that the accused cannot be forced to give evidence against her/himself. Forcing suspects to sign statements admitting their guilt violates the constitutional guarantee against self- imination and breaches provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC]. It is also inadmissible as ence in a court of law. In addition, causing hurt to get a confession is punishable by imprisonment up to n years. (I Pulled all this from a document hosted here http://tinyurl.com/3y95my). Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 11/22 11/9/07 The The of the High Court of Bombay having exonerated the Superintendent of Police and other has subjected the under trial prisoner to an unwarranted humiliation and indignity which cannot ent that the police do not have the right to subject any citizen to indignities or The The isely what the demands of our legal order forbid. They s than resorting to physical torture. If the custodians of law themselves e questions. or in other penal laws. ‘Torture’ of a human being by another . The the s hat sometimes you can almost touch it, but it is also so intangible that there is not way to you he human rights has been the subject of so many co , “C destroys, to a very large ined Nidhi and applied mula of attempting to get Nidhi to implicate her husband in a case of abduction and forcible a response to a writ of Habeas Corpus, the Supreme Court passed this judgment, even after Nidhi as released and brought this sorry episode to a logical conclusion. Right To Be Treated With Dignity By The police: Supreme Court (Ravikant Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Others: 1991: “A Division Bench respondents, held that respondent 4 Shri Prakash Chavan, Inspector of Police, who is one of the appellants before us, be done to any citizen of Indian and accordingly directed him to pay the compensation and he was also censured as mentioned above”. It is implicit in this judgm humiliation such as unwarranted handcuffing, verbal or physical abuse, or indulge in intimidation as life, liberty of a citizen quarantined under article 2, includes life with dignity and liberty with dignity. Liberty must mean freedom from humiliation and indignities at the lands of the authorities to whom the custody of a person may pass temporarily or otherwise under the law of the land. Police Cannot Torture You Or Resort To 3rd Degree Methods: Supreme Court (Bhagwan Singh vs State of Punjab: 1999 Cr.L.J. 2201( Bombay) has held that: “It may be a legitimate right of any Officer to interrogate or arrest any suspect on some credible material but such an arrest must be in accordance with the law and the interrogation does not mean inflicting injuries. It should be in its true sense purposeful, namely, to make the investigation effective. Torturing a person and using third degree methods are of medieval nature and they are barbaric and contrary to law. The Police would be accomplishing behind their closed doors prec must adopt some scientific method indulge in committing crimes then no member of the society is safe and secure. If Police Officers who have to provide security and protection to the citizens indulge in such methods they are creating a sense of insecurity in the minds of the citizens. It is more heinous than a game-keeper becoming a poacher.” The Definition Of Torture And Compensation For Illegal Detention: How does the Supreme Court define torture? Is it limited to physical violence only? What if a citizen was detained illegally to extract a confession by torture? Is there no provision to compensate the person for the illegal detention? The answers to these questions lie in several judgments of the Supreme Court, a couple of which are sufficient to answer thes Here is a definition of torture by the Supreme Court (D.K. BASU,ASHOK K. JOHRI Vs.STATE OF WEST BENGAL,STATE OF U.P: DATE:18/12/1996 BENCH: KULDIP SINGH, A.S. ANAND): “Torture” has not been defined in Constitution human being is essentially an instrument to impose the will of the ‘strong’ over the ‘weak’ by suffering word torture today has become synonymous with the darker side of human civilization. Torture is a wound in oul so painful t heal it. Torture is anguish squeezing in your chest, cold as ice and heavy as a stone paralyzing as sleep and dark as the abyss. Torture is despair and fear and rage and hate. It is a desire to kill and destroy including rself.” Adriana P. Bartow “No violation of any one of t Conventions and Declarations as ‘torture’- all aiming at total banning of it in all forms, but inspite of the mmitments made to eliminate torture, the fact remains that torture is more widespread not that ever before ustodial torture” is a naked violation of human dignity and degradation with extent, the individual personality.” In yet another judgment, the Supreme Court (Arvinder Singh Bagga v. State of U.P, 1994) expanded the definition of torture to include mental torture and also provided a provision for compensation in the event of illegal detention and torture. This judgment takes on greater relevance in light of the murder of Rizwanur Rehman as this case involved the elopement of a young woman, Nidhi. The police deta the usual for marriage. In w Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 12/22 11/9/07 The Supreme Court described the way the police treated Nidhi, the victim, in the following manner: surrounding circumstances I er family members were brought in to pressurise her into implicating them. nner: alculated to From “Pay The • • eirs. Time judgment. Upon such payment it will be concerned police officers. d torture by the police. t from the salary of the guilty officers. gra (Delhi HC, WP (Crl.) No. 988/2007, 10.10.2007) says: fidely f the arrest of the petitioner in a criminal case was illegal, unless on the mental stress and strain and to remain always “On a careful consideration of all the evidence on record in the light of the accept the claim of Nidhi that she was tortured by the police officers on 24th, 25th and 26th July, 1993. On 24.7.93 she was pressurised by J.C. Upadhyaya S.H.O., Sukhpal Singh, S.S.I, and Narendrapal Singh S.I. and threatened and commanded to implicate her husband and his family in a case of abduction and forcible marriage thereafter. She was threatened with physical violence to her husband and to herself in case of her default and when she refused h On 25th July 1993 she was jolted out of sleep by Sukhpal Singh S.S.I. and made to remain standing for a long time. She was abused and jostled and threatened by J.C. Upadhyay, Sukhpal Singh and Narendrapal Singh with injury to her body if she did not write down the dictated note. Sukhpal Singh SSI even assaulted her on her leg with Danda and poked it in her stomach. She did not yield to the pressure.” The Ho’nble judge then went on to define torture in the following ma “Torture is not merely physical, there may be mental torture and psychological torture c create fright and submission to the demands or commands. When the threats proceed from a person in Authority and that too by a police officer the mental torture caused by it is even more grave” this judgment, it is very clear that each time our families are threatened by the police with the old threat of up, or else...”, or “confess or else...” they are subjecting them to torture. court then went on to pass the following orders: The State of Uttar Pradesh will take immediate steps to launch prosecution against all the police officers involved in this sordid affair. The State shall pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000 to Nidhi, Rs. 10,000 to Charanjit Singh Bagga and Rs. 5,000 to each of the other persons who were illegally detained and humiliated for no fault of th for making payment will be three months from the date of this open to the State to recover personally the amount of compensation from the egal detention an This judgment makes it clear that a citizen can claim compensation for ill The icing on the cake will be if the state recovers the compensation amoun When to File For Compensation For Illegal Detention: Justice Shiv Narain Dhin “When a criminal case is registered against somebody, the Court cannot jump to conclusion, merely on the basis of FIR, whether the case was a false case or a truthful case and whether the petitioner has been mala arrested or has been rightly arrested. FIR is merely first information given to the police so as to bring machinery of criminal law in motion. FIR is not considered as an encyclopedia of facts. It is only after challan is filed, the Court can form an opinion, at the time of framing of charge, whether a case was made out against the accused worth trial or not. If the evidence collected by the prosecution does not disclose commission of any offence, by the accused even prima facie, the Court has to discharge the accused. The accused at that stage can lay a claim that the case was got registered against him malafidely and police also acted malafidely. Even after charge is framed, on conclusion of trial if a Court finds that no case was made out against the accused and he was falsely implicated, the Court is bound to acquit the accused and that will be the second stage whether accused gets a right to claim that he was falsely implicated. The present Writ Petition filed by the petitioner has not been filed after discharge of the petitioner or after acquittal of the petitioner. In a Writ Petition this Court cannot declare i face of it, it appears that it was a case where no arrest could have been made.” Inordinate Delay In Police Investigation May Lead To A Quashed FIR: If you are amongst those against whom an FIR has been filed but no further action has been taken, then you may be able to get the FIR quashed as per this judgment. Here is the ruling by the SC (State of Andhra Pradesh vs P.V. Pavithran, 1990), which held that: “A lethargic and lackadaisical manner of investigation over a prolonged period makes an accused in a criminal proceeding to live every moment under extreme emotional and Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 13/22 11/9/07 under a fear psychosis. Therefore, it is imperative that if investigation of a criminal proceeding staggers on The The esident Vs. State of Assam & Others: 1996 Cr.L.J. er or characteristics of each individual e nature or length of sentence or the number of convictions rele Ar t A The Su Maharas women. The Cus The The H.K won that pro stly clear that if icer in charge of a police station, such with tardy pace due to the indolence and inefficiency of the investigating agency causing unreasonable and substantial delay resulting in grave prejudice or disadvantage to the accused, the Court as the protector of the right and personal liberty of the citizen will step in and resort to the drastic remedy of quashing further proceedings in such investigation. However, there are offences of grave magnitude, which would necessarily involve considerable time for unearthing the crimes and bringing the culprits to book. Therefore, it is not possible to formulate inflexible guidelines or rigid principles of uniform application for speedy investigation or to stipulate any arbitrary period of limitation within which investigation in a criminal case should be completed.” Police Do Not Have A Right To Handcuff You: Supreme Court (Citizen for Democracy through its, pr 324 “As a rule it shall be the rule that handcuffs or other fetters shall not be 7) has held that: forced on a prisoner – convicted or under –trial – while transporting or in transit form one jail to another or from jail to Court and back. The police and the jail authorities on their own, shall have no authority without obtaining order from Magistrate to direct the handcuffing of any inmate of a jail in the country or during transport from one jail to anoth from jail to court and track. The relevant considerations for putting a prisoner in fetters are the character antecedents and propensities of the prisoner. The peculiar and special prisoner have to be taken into consideration. Th or the gruesome character of the crime the prisoner is alleged to have committed are not by themselves vant considerations.” res nd Custody Of Women: preme Court (Christian Community Welfare Council of India and another Vs. Government of htra & another: 1995 Cr.L.J. 4223 (Bombay)) has laid out procedure for the arrest and detention of Here is an excerpt: “The State Government should issue instructions immediately in unequivocal and unambiguous terms to all concerned that no female person shall be detained or arrested without the presence of lady constable and in no case, after sun set and before sun-rise” The Police Cannot Detain A Citizen For The Purpose Of An Inquiry/Interrogation: Bombay High Court (Ashak Hussain Allah Detha, alias Siddique and another Vs. Assistant Collector of toms (P) Bombay and another: 1999 Cr.L.J. 2201(Bombay)) has held that: “The investigating Officers may lawfully detain a suspect for an offence. But detention in custody for interrogation is not authorized by law. The investigating Officers may detain for an offence only. Any restrain on a person’s liberty except for an offence is illegal. There is no authority in the investigating Officers to detain a person for the purpose of interrogation or helping them in the enquiry.” Police Must Register A Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court (Lallan Chaudhary & Ors Vs State of Bihar & Anr. DATE: 12/10/2006. BENCH: .SEMA & P.K.BALASUBRAMANYAN) has held that the police must register a cognizable complaint. If you dered why the case was registered, though the complaint was flimsy, this is the reason. But the law also says upon investigation, if the complaint was proved to be false, then the officer can recommend criminal ceedings under section 182. Here is the excerpt: “Section 154 of the Code thus casts a statutory duty upon police officer to register the case, as disclosed in the complaint, and then to proceed with the investigation. The mandate of Section 154 is manife any information disclosing a cognizable offence is laid before an off police officer has no other option except to register the case on the basis of such information.” The Delhi HC (Priya Gupta Vs The State. Date Of Decision: 20.04.2007. Hon'ble Justice Reva Khetrapal) has held that: Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 14/22 11/9/07 “It is, therefore, manifestly clear that if any information disclosing a cognizable offence is laid before an officer in charge of a police station satisfying the requirements of Section 154(1) of the Code, the said police officer has no other option except to enter the substance thereof in the prescribed form, that is to say, to register a case on the basis of such information. Hon'ble judge also goes on to say that: The "Indisputably, if as a result of the investigation, if it was subsequently found that the allegations made in the complaint could not be substantiated or were false, the investigating agency would have been at liberty to recommend initiation of criminal proceedings against the complainant in terms of Section 182 I.P.C." FIR Is A Publ An ic Document: of the FIR to the accused. The reality is that an FIR is a S THE STATE OF GUJARAT, JUDGE: B C PATEL, DATE: 13/03/19): The Right To A Speedy Trial: the Right to a speedy trial is a Fundamental Right. Here are two cases where he State Of Bihar Date Of Judgment: 08/10/1998 The In quite a few cases, the police do not provide a copy public document. Here is an excerpt from a judgment from the Gujarat High Court (JAYANTIBHAI LALUBHAI PATEL V “Whenever FIR is registered against the accused, a copy of it is forwarded to the Court under provisions of the Code; thus it becomes a public document. Considering (1) the provisions of Art. 21 of the Constitution of India, (2) First Information Report is a public document in view of S. 74 of the Evidence Act; (3) Accused gets right as allegations are made against him under provisions of S. 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, and (4) FIR is a document to which S. 162 of the Code does not apply and is of considerable value as on that basis investigation commenced and that is the first version of the prosecution, as and when application is made by accused for a certified copy of the complaint, the Court to which it is forwarded should give certified copy of the FIR, if the application and legal fees thereof have been tendered for the same in the Court of law.” The Supreme Court has ruled that they have done so: • Hussainara Khatoon & Ors.Vs.Home Secretary, State Of Bihar Date Of Judgment12/02/1979 • Raj Deo Sharma Vs.T Supreme Court has held that: “The accused in these cases might have been on bail - but the injustice of pendency of trial for long periods is the uncertainty and the concomitant anxiety suffered by the under-trial. The under-trial is inhibited in making future plans for his life or executing present ones due to the uncertainty which pendency of trial brings. His confidence starts to erode and at the end of the trial, even if he is honorably acquitted, the scars of the long trial remain. He feels condemned despite the acquittal.” The The Uni Sup under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The State under Right To Information: Supreme Court has held that the right to information is a fundamental right. In its judgment (People’s on for Civil Liberties and another Vs Union of India and others. Justice S. B. Sinha. Date:06 Jan 2004) the reme Court has said that: “Right of information is a fundamental right Clause (2) of Article 19 of the Constitution, however, is entitled to impose reasonable restrictions inter alia in the interest of the State.” The govt authority needs to provide information within 48Hrs if rights under life and liberty are affected. An RTI is a useful weapon if the police are holding members of your family. The Right To Be Given A Reason: The failu you of the decision ctivity. The emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the "inscrutable face of the sphinx", it can, by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the Courts to perform their appellate function Supreme Court (Daya Ram Vs Raghunath & Ors DATE: 15/06/2007) has stated that the re to give reasons is denial of justice. This is a recent judgment and is very useful if the magistrate is denying r bail application and no reason is given. Here is an excerpt: “Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice. Reasons are live links between the mind taker to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at. Reasons substitute subjectivity by obje Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 15/22 11/9/07 or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reasons is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before Court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in rutable face of a sphinx" is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or The Thi arents. to shared household and defines the meaning of a shared household. If your ing residence und pare pro in t pro The ip. He tedly the respondent had lived in the property in question in the past, hence the and wife d parents, nterpretation canvassed by the relied upon Section 19(1)(f) of the Act and be given an alternative accommodation. In our opinion, the claim for alternative other words, a speaking out. The "insc quasi-judicial performance.” Right To Residence Under The Domestic Violence Act: s judgment of the Supreme Court (Batra Vs Batra. Mar 2007) is of paramount importance to your p This judgment defines the right parents or siblings own the house you live in, then, the right of your spouse to reside in the same house, under the DV Act, does not apply. I am including this judgment here, as the right to residence under the DV is being used for extortion. The economy is booming and in every city, real estate prices are going up. By claim er the DV Act, an attempt is made to grab or lock down the property to extort money. Think about it; the nts are facing a 498A and to top it, the accuser files a right to residence to harass them and worse, the tection officer grants it because he doesn’t know the rules. How long will these senior citizens and retirees last hese circumstances, if they are denied the right to live in peace in their own homes and their rightfully earned perty is being denied to them? Supreme Court in this judgment says: “19. Learned Counsel for the respondent Smt. Taruna Batra stated that the definition of shared household includes a household where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage had lived in a domestic relationsh contended that since admit said property is her shared household We cannot agree with this submission. 20. If the aforesaid submission is accepted, then it will mean that wherever the husband and wife lived together in the past that property becomes a shared household. It is quite possible that the husband sband's paternal gran may have lived together in dozens of places e.g. with the husband's father, hu nts, brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces etc. If the i his maternal parents, uncles, au learned Counsel for the respondent is accepted, all these houses of the husband's relatives will be shared households and the wife can well insist in living in the all these houses of her husband's relatives merely because she had stayed with her husband for some time in those houses in the past. Such a view would lead to chaos and would be absurd.. It is well settled that any interpretation which leads to absurdity should not be accepted. 21. Learned Counsel for the respondent Smt. Taruna Batra has claimed that she should accommodation can only be made against the husband and not against the husband's in-laws or other relatives. 22. As regards Section 17(1) of the Act, in our opinion the wife is only entitled to claim a right to residence in a shared household, and a 'shared household' would only mean the house belonging to or taken on rent by the husband, or the house which belongs to the joint family of which the husband is a member. The property in question in the present case neither belongs to Amit Batra nor was it taken on rent by him nor is it a joint old'.” An Adult Male Person: taining any relief under this Act an application family property of which the husband Amit Batra is a member, it is the exclusive property of appellant No. 2, mother of Amit Batra. Hence it cannot be called a 'shared househ DV Act Can Only Be Filed Against In yet another blessing in the form of a High Court judgment, the MP High Court (Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.1266/07), ruled that: “Thus, it is clear by the definition of respondent that for ob can be filed or a proceeding can be initiated against only adult male person and on such application or under such proceeding, aforementioned protection order can be passed. Obviously those orders will also be passed only against the adult male person.” Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 16/22 11/9/07 I am wom Com If yo and Dhingra. Justice Dhingra, (Smt Neera Singh Vs State Of Delhi, Delhi HC, Feb 2007) had given a landmark rovisions of law while entertaining such complaints and action is taken merely without any verification that a large number of false complaints are Just purv CAW The no p The just thankful that the tyranny of the DV Act will be limited to the adult male members of the family and the en will be spared. pliance With The Dowry Prohibition Act: u find that the 498A wife has charged that you had huge sums of money at the time of marriage in the FIR, you are wondering how to prove your innocence, then thank god for the judgments of Justice Shiv Narain judgment that deals with this issue: “Now-a-days, exorbitant claims are made about the amount spent on marriage and other ceremonies and on dowry and gifts. In some cases claim is made of spending crores of rupees on dowry without disclosing the source of income and how funds flowed. I consider time has come that courts should insist upon disclosing source of such funds and verification of income from tax returns and police should insist upon the compliance of the Rules under Dowry Prohibition Act and should not entertain any complaint, if the rules have not been complied with. If huge cash amounts are alleged to be given at the time of marriage which are not accounted anywhere, such cash transactions should be brought to the notice of the Income Tax Department by the Court so that source of income is verified and the person is brought to law. It is only because the Courts are not insisting upon compliance with the relevant p on the statement of the complainant, pouring in.” ice Dhingra also ruled in this judgment that taunting, though a despicable act by itself, does not fall under the iew of mental cruelty under 498A. Cell Proceedings Are Voluntary: Delhi HC in two consecutive ruling has held that the proceedings of the CAW cells are voluntary. They have ower to enforce an appearance. I quote: “It is made clear that CAW Cell has no authority to secure the presence of any person either by coercion or by threat. CAW Cell is only a conciliatory body where efforts are made for conciliation with the free will of the parties. If any person is not willing to go to CAW Cell, he cannot be compelled. It is also directed that CAW Cell, in future, instead of issuing summons to the parties shall send request letters asking them to appear for the purpose of conciliation and not for the purpose of investigation. The petitioner is at liberty not to appear before CAW Cell. No threat or coercive steps shall be taken by the CAW Cell.” link to the judgment/order is given here: (http://tinyurl.com/2gf5wo) es Of Jurisdiction: ly, the lovely 498A wives have been filing cases against their hubbies and in-laws in a different city just to ss them. N Issu Late hara ot to worry. The Supreme Court, (Y.Abraham Ajith and Ors. Vs. Inspector of Police, Chennai 200 I quote the above explanation from a judgment of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog of the Delhi High Court. I have /yvudc7 4), ruled on the issue of jurisdiction. This was a 498A case: “Under Section 177 of the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 an offence shall ordinarily be enquired into and tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction offence was committed. In the decision reported as 2004 (2) CC Cases (SC) 289, Y.Abraham Ajith and Ors. Vs. Inspector of Police, Chennai, it was held that where no part of cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of a concerned court, proceedings before the Magistrate had to be quashed.” enclosed a link to the judgment/order (http://tinyurl.com ). Please read the contents of this link http://tinyurl.com/2mbsxz to clearly understand issues of jurisdiction. NB It is rece of s ency to issue Non Bailable Warrants without adequate justification, a practice the Supreme Court (Appeal (crl.) 1392 of 2007, 09/10/2007) decried. Here is an excerpt of that ruling: Ws And Arrest Warrants: a matter of debate that there has been a decline in the quality of the magistrates in the lower courts. The most nt illustration of this occurred when the Delhi HC sent a magistrate back to the Judicial Academy for an act tupidity. There has also been a tend Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 17/22 11/9/07 “When non-bailable warrants should be issued: Non-bailable warrant should be issued to bring a person to court when summons of bailable warrants would ld be when: of the opinion that a summon will suffice in getting the appearance of the . If the accused seem to be avoiding the summons, the court, in the second instance should nce both personal liberty and societal interest before issuing warrants. There cannot be any us crime and it is feared that he is likely to tamper or destroy the evidence ance of non-bailable warrants should be avoided. The In m crue act case of 2 id that the behavior patterns that the marriage between the parties wn and qualified to be the ground for divorce.: In a of i h such h as to f the petitioner. While arriving at such conclusion, regard must be had to the social t be unlikely to have the desired result. This cou • it is reasonable to believe that the person will not voluntarily appear in court; or • the police authorities are unable to find the person to serve him with a summon; or • it is considered that the person could harm someone if not placed into custody immediately. As far as possible, if the court is accused in the court, the summon or the bailable warrants should be preferred. The warrants either bailable or non-bailable should never be issued without proper scrutiny of facts and complete application of mind, due to the extremely serious consequences and ramifications which ensue on issuance of warrants. The court must very carefully examine whether the Criminal Complaint or FIR has not been filed with an oblique motive. In complaint cases, at the first instance, the court should direct serving of the summons along with the copy of the complaint issue bailable- warrant. In the third instance, when the court is fully satisfied that the accused is avoiding the court s proceeding intentionally, the process of issuance of the non-bailable warrant should be resorted to. Personal liberty is paramount, therefore, we caution courts at the first and second instance to refrain from issuing non-bailable warrants. The power being discretionary must be exercised judiciously with extreme care and caution. The court should properly bala straight-jacket formula for issuance of warrants but as a general rule, unless an accused is charged with the commission of an offence of a heino or is likely to evade the process of law, issu The Court should try to maintain proper balance between individual liberty and the interest of the public and the State while issuing non-bailable warrant.” Definition Of Mental Cruelty: ost cases, a 498A complaint will consist of a few lines alleging a single or maybe a few instances of mental lty. That’s all it takes for the police to literally run after the accused to arrest them. The reality is that a stray does not constitute mental cruelty. There are many judgments dealing with mental cruelty. In the most recent , while pronouncing a judgment on divorce on the grounds of cruelty, the Supreme Court (Appeal (civil) 151 004 Samar Ghosh Vs Jaya Ghosh DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26/03/2007) has sa so mentioned must persist over a period of time to warrant the conclusion had irretrievably broken do “Mental cruelty is a state of mind; the feeling of deep anguish, disappointment, frustration in one spouse caused by the conduct of the other for a long time might constitute mental cruelty. So would a sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment calculated to torture or render miserable the life of the spouse, and sustained unjustifiable conduct and behavior of one spouse actually affecting physical and mental health of the other”. nother judgment, the Supreme Court (GVN Kameswara Rao Vs. G. Jabilli- (2002) 2 SCC 296) taking note ts earlier decision in the case of (1994) 1 SCC 337, V. Bhagat Vs. D. Bhagat, observed that: - ''Mental cruelty in Section 13(1)(i-a) can broadly be defined as that conduct which inflicts upon the other party such mental pain and suffering as would make it not possible for that party to live with the other. In other words, mental cruelty must be of such a nature that the parties cannot reasonably be expected to live together. The situation must be such that the wronged party cannot reasonably be asked to put up wit conduct and continue to live with the other party. It is not necessary trove that the mental cruelty is suc cause injury to the health o status, educational level of the parties, the society they move in, the possibility or otherwise of the parties ever living together in case they are already living apart and all other relevant facts and circumstances which it is neither possible nor desirable to set out exhaustively. What is cruelty in one case may not amount to cruelty in another case. It is a matter to be determined in each case having regard to the facts and circumstances of tha Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 18/22 11/9/07 case. If it is a case of accusations and allegations, regard must also be had to the context in which they were The nto action based on a complaint detailing a single act of ment divorced on the basis of men ther spouse. Why do the at best A D The "Bir es iate proximity of the marriage or thereabout, the bail should be granted. It An Tiw le offence has been committed, in appropriate cases an a remedy by invoking the power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Som made.'' reason I added this judgment here is that the police swing i al cruelty and calling it dowry harassment. People go to the Supreme Court to get tal cruelty. It is tough to get divorced, even if there is a sustained pattern of abuse by ei police act with such haste to arrest people on complaints based on allegations, which are flimsy ? irection On Granting Bail: following direction was given by Chief Justice of Jharkhand Mr V. K. Gupta on 11.07.2001 against a case endra Jha v/s The State of Jharkhand , A.B.A No. 4654 of 2001". “On the question of grant of bail to accused I may also observe that there is another category of offenc where normally bail should be granted and refusal should be an exception. I’m talking of offences under Section 498A I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Provision Act, 1961.… In those cases where it is manifestly clear, on a plain reading of the police report or the contents of the private complaint that neither any grievous injury has been inflicted upon the alleged victim nor is there any other clear proof of the alleged victim having physically suffered and that there is also no serious allegation supported with positive proof of dowry having been demanded in the immed happens quite often that in ordinary matrimonial disputes or where there is some discordant note in a matrimonial relationship, the woman as an alleged victim sets in motion 498A.” NOTE: I have been unable to find the complete judgment. If anyone has it, please inform a SIF volunteer. Explanation Of Writ Mandamus: This is a judgment from 1970. The case is S.M. Sharma Vs. Bipen Kumar ari. Here is an excerpt: “It appears to us that, though the Code of Criminal Procedure gives to the police unfettered power to investigate all cases where they suspect that a cognizab aggrieved person can always seek Constitution under which, if the High Court could be convinced that the power of investigation has been exercised by a police officer mala fide, the High Court can always issue a writ of mandamus restraining the police officer from misusing his legal power” Officers With Authority To Investigate 498A Cases: It is a myth that officers of the rank of DSP are the only ones empowered to investigate 498A cases. Here is a ruling from the Chennai High Court (Crl.OP.No. 32871 of 2004 And CRL.M.P.NO.10462 OF 2004 AND 544 OF 2005) which states who can investigate a 498A case: “The further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the investigation should have been done only by the Deputy Superintendent of Police who is defined as police officer under the Rules and not by the Inspector of Police, cannot be countenanced. The Rule is a subordinate legislation and the provisions under the Criminal Procedure Code give full power on the Inspector of Police to proceed with the matter and apart from that, the definition for Police officer would clearly reveal as submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that nowhere there is a prohibition that below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police shall not exercise the power to investigate the case and hence the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners in this regard cannot be countenanced.” e Relevant Sections Of the Indian Penal Code (IPC): An Explanation Of Section 182 IPC (6 Months+ Jail For Filing False Complaints): Here is an explanation of Section 182 from the Punjab And Haryana High Court (Harbhajan Singh Bajwa Vs Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala Criminal Misc. No. 9841-M of 2000, dated April 18, 2000): “Whenever any information is given to the authorities and when the said authority found that the averments made in the complaint were false, it is for the said authority to initiate action under Section 182 I.P.C. The offence under Section 182 I.P.C. is punishable with imprisonment for a period of six months or with fine or with both. When the authorities themselves found in the years 1996 and 1997 Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 19/22 11/9/07 after due investigation that the averments made by Ashwani Kumar in his complaint were false, it is for them to initiate proceedings immediately or within the prescribed period as provided under Section 468 Code of Criminal Procedure. The acceptance of the cancellation report by the Court is immaterial. It does not save the limitation under Section 468 Cr.P.C., which prescribes the period of one year for taking cognizance if offence is punishable, with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year. Since the offence under Section 182 I.P.C. is punishable with imprisonment for a period of six months only, the authority should file the complaint under Section 182 I.P.C. within one year from the date when that authority found that the allegations made in the complaint were false. Since more than four years lapsed either description for a term which may extend to seven years, The This is th CHRI from the date when the authority found the allegations were false, no question of filing any complaint under Section 182 I.P.C. at this belated stage arises.” Section 182 is the offence of giving false information to a public servant. This section is important as it allows the acquitted to press for criminal charges against the filers of the false 498A. Section 182 is a non-cognizable offence. To pursue a case under Section 182, an application under section 155 of CrPC needs to be made to a magistrate, whose consent is required to investigate non-cognizable offences. The best example of Section 182 is in the Rahul Mahajan case when the police went after the doctors of Apollo hospital for faking the toxicology report. There are a couple of other sections of the IPC, sections 211 and 358 of IPC. Section 211 provides punishment for making a wrong complaint and false charges of offence. Similarly Section 358 of Cr. P.C. deals with cases of groundless arrests. Section 330 Of The IPC (Protection From Extortion Of Confession By The Police): Section 330 of the IPC is meant to protect you from the police who extract a confession by extra legal means. This is what the section says: Voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession, or to compel restoration of property: Whoever voluntarily causes hurt for the purpose of extorting from the sufferer or from any person interested in the sufferer, any confession or any information, which may lead to the detection of an offence or misconduct, or for the purpose of constraining the sufferer or any person interested in the sufferer to restore or to cause the restoration of any property or valuable security or to satisfy any claim or demand, or to give information which may lead to the restoration of any property or valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of and shall also be liable to fine. Illustrations: (a) A, a police-officer, tortures Z in order to induce Z to confess that he committed a crime. A is guilty of an offence under this section. (b) A, a police-officer, tortures B to induce him to point out where certain stolen property is deposited. A is guilty of an offence under this section. (c) A, a revenue officer, tortures Z in order to compel him to pay certain arrears of revenue due from Z. A is guilty of an offence under this section. (d) A, a Zamindar, tortures a raiyat in order to compel him to pay his rent. A is guilty of an offence under this section. Process Of Indian Criminal Justice: e outline of the process of criminal justice. I got this from . It has the following steps: of criminal justice is initiated with the 2. mai • • • 1. Registration of the First Information Report (FIR). The process registration of the First Information Report. The FIR is a written document prepared by the police when they receive information about the commission of a cognizable offence. You have the right to see the FIR. The police officer proceeds to the scene of crime and investigates the facts of the case. Police investigation nly includes: Examination of the scene of crime. Examination of witnesses and suspects. Recording of statements. Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 20/22 11/9/07 • • • • • • 3. Afte mag 4. 5. 6. • Cod The gu commun July 4, 1 which to Conducting searches. Seizing property. Collecting fingerprint, footprint and other scientific evidence. Consulting records and making entries in the prescribed records, like case diary, daily diary, station diary etc. Making arrests and detentions (Justifications need to be provided). Interrogation of the accused r completion of investigation, the officer in charge of the police station sends a report to the area istrate. The report sent by the investigating officer is in the form of a charge sheet, if there is sufficient ence to prosecute the accused. If sufficient evidence is evid not available, such a report is called the final report. On receiving the charge sheet, the court takes cognizance and initiates the trial of the case. The charges are framed. The procedure requires the prosecution to prove the charges against the accused beyond a shadow of doubt. The accused is given a full opportunity to defend himself. If the trial ends in conviction, the court may award any of the following punishments: • Fine. • Forfeiture of property. • Simple imprisonment. • Rigorous imprisonment. Imprisonment for life. • Death Sentence. • The Death Penalty e Of Conduct For The Police In India: idelines for the code of conduct for the police were issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs and icated to Chief Secretaries of all States/ Union Territories and Heads of Central Police Organizations on 985. I sourced this from CHRI. A guideline is a statement or other indication of policy or procedure by determine a course of action, in other words, this is binding policy. 1. The police must bear faithful allegiance to the Constitution of India and respect and uphold the rights of the citiz 2. The propriety or necessity of any law duly enacted. They should enforce the law firm ally, without fear or favor, malice or vindictiveness. ens as guaranteed by it. police should not question the ly and imparti 3. The police should recognize and respect the limitations of their powers and functions. They should not usurp or even ciary and sit in judgment on cases to avenge individuals and seem to usurp the functions of the judi punish t 4. In secur e police should as far as practicable, use the method irreduci nces should be used. 5. The pri their eff e of both and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them. he guilty. ing the observance of law or in maintaining order, th s of persuasion, advice and warning. When the application of force becomes inevitable, only the ble minimum of force required in the circumsta me duty of the police is to prevent crime and disorder and the police must recognize that the test of iciency is the absenc 6. The police must recognize that they are members of the public, with the only difference that in the interest of the society and on its behalf they are employed to give full time attention to duties, which are normally incumbent on every citizen to perform. 7. The police should realize that the efficient performance of their duties would be dependent on the extent of ready cooperation that they receive from the public. This, in turn, will depend on their ability to secure public approval of their conduct and actions and to earn and retain public respect and confidence. 8. The police should always keep the welfare of the people in mind and be sympathetic and considerate towards them. They should always be ready to offer individual service and friendship and render necessary assistance social standing. to all without regard to their wealth and / or Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 21/22 11/9/07 9. e lace duty before self, should maintain calm in the face of danger, scorn or ridicule sacrifice their lives in protecting those of others. Th police should always p and should be ready to 10. hould be dependable and impartial; they The police should always be courteous and well mannered; they s should possess dignity and courage; and should cultivate character and the trust of the people. * Issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs and communicated to Chief Secretaries of all States/ Union Territories and Heads of Central Police Organizations on July 4, 1985 48 the fundamental basis of the prestige of th 11. e police. Recognizing this, the 12. rise above personal n istic or sectional diversities and to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of om ections of society. The Ha cu The Mu sted on Friday, June 22, 2007, ran the story of Baban Dhus, 52, a teacher in a BMC sc o ice arrested him on December 3, 2006 after his daughter-in-law Vaishali filed a complai th his family were harassing her for dowry. Vaishali’s husband Nivrutti, her mother-in- law Alka Dyaneshwar and his wife Jyoti were also held. All five were given bail two days later on t edhan that Vaishali had brought along at the time of her marriage in Ma the fou Integrity of the highest order is police must keep their private lives scrupulously clean, develop self-restraint and be truthful and honest in thought and deed, in both personal and official life, so that the public may regard them as exemplary citizens. The police should recognize that their full utility to the State is best ensured only by maintaining a high obedience to the standard of discipline, faithful performance of duties in accordance with law and implicit lawful directions of commanding ranks and absolute loyalty to the force and by keeping themselves in the state of constant training and preparedness. 13. As members of a secular, democratic state, the police should strive continually to and promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India, prejudices scending religious, lingu tra en and disadvantaged s w nd ffed School Teacher: o mbai Mirror, in an article p i pol ho l. The Kalachowk at her husband an nt d , Nivrutti’s elder brother he condition that they would return the Sthre y 2006. When the police took Dhus to his Sewri home so that he could hand over the Sthreedhan, they parked police vehicle well outside his colony. Dhus was handcuffed and paraded all the way to his house, and the other r were made to walk behind him, hands folded. You can read the full story here (http://tinyurl.com/2u9pbp). e is a question for you. Which one of the Supreme Court judgments did th Her e police violate? Do you think this wou I believe r rights, as you may under go the same persecution as this school teacher. The edu Commi fixation. Can you expect a semi skill Can you the eyes I wi ld have happened if this teacher knew his Fundamental Rights? that you need to know you cational qualifications for a constable are 10th or 12th pass, depending upon the state, and The Fifth Pay ssion classified a constable as a semi-skilled laborer for the purpose of pay ed laborer to know and respect your rights? imagine Union Minister Arjun Singh or members of his family handcuffed? Why not? Aren’t we all equal in of the law? sh to thank the AP CID. They had an excellent website (http://www.cidap.gov.in/) containing stats, judgments er information. I’ve sourced many of my judgments from their website ( and oth http://tinyurl.com/3ab4rf), and I to acknowledge that. Unfortunately, the website is no longer functioning. wanted Anyway, I discovered that they sour ced all this from a document from the BPRD called “Path Breaking Judgements on Police”. Here is the link: nyurl.com/29m6ms http://ti . It am e goons fo dissemin Kee Indian p Read on xperience of my fam a az s me that with so many laws, judgments and guidelines in place, the police continue to conduct themselves as r hire than a force to enforce and uphold the law. It also amazes me that this information was never widely ated by the central or state governments. p a copy of this document with you for reference. This may turn out to be the shield you need when facing the olice. to understand what your interaction with the Indian police may be like. I detailed the e ily, s this is what we had to endure. Copyright: ipc498A.wordpress.com 22/22