|
Punjab Police Act faces legal
challenge in High Court
WSN Network
CHANDIGAH: The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday issued
notice of motion to the State of Punjab, Director General of Police,
Union of India and others on a Public Interest Litigation
challenging the provisions of Punjab Police Act, 2007. A Bench
comprising Chief Justice Vijender Jain and Justice Kanwaljit Singh
Ahluwalia issued notice on a PIL by Resurgence India, a
public-spirited organisation pursuing the cause of police reform in
the State of Punjab. Going into the circumstances leading to the
filing of the petition, the petitioner's counsel said that the
necessity had arisen as the re- spondent State of Punjab had
sabotaged the entire effort of the Supreme Court regarding police
reform as mentioned in Prakash Singh's case and also those of the
various commissions and committees on police reform by bringing out
a "retrograde Act".
The petition said
that the new Act reflected the respondents' acute apathy,
indifference, insensitivity, irresponsibility and absence of will to
initiate police reform. The petition also claimed that the
respondents failed to visualise and assess the devastating impact of
ever-increasing politicisation of the police organisation in Punjab,
resulting in the creation of chaotic conditions that were almost
unmanageable. Describing certain provisions of the Act as archaic
and colonial as the Police Act of 1861 framed by the British, the
petition sought directions for quashing certain portions of the new
Act, which the petition said defied the letter, spirit and in-
tention of the Supreme Court judgment on police reforms in Prakash
Singh's case.
 Citing examples, the
petition said the Supreme Court on selec- tion of DGP had suggested
that it should be made from amongst three senior-most officers
empanelled by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). The state,
however, was making selection from amongst IPS officers in the rank
of DGP or those eligible to hold this rank. As a result, there was
no transparency in the selection process, the UPSC was no longer in
the picture and the DGP remained dependent on political masters.
The petitioner also
sought directions for quashing in particular the provisions
regarding selection of the Director General of Police (DGP), his
tenure, the State Security Commission, Police Establish- ment Board,
Police Complaints Au- thority both at the state and the district
levels, and the minimum tenure of police officers on operational
duties in the field, besides the separation of investigation police
from the law and order force. Further, seeking directions regarding
reforms indicated by the Supreme Court in the judgment in Prakash
Singh's case, the petitioner quoted the apex court's observations,
saying, "We have also no doubt that Sorabjee Committee Report and
the new Act will receive due attention of the Central Government,
which may recommend to the State Governments to consider passing of
State Acts on the suggested lines".
Mentioning that
barring a few cosmetic and superficial changes on peripheral
matters, the Act was the same as the British one, the petition said
that as such, the apex court's effort to insulate the police from
the growing tendency of playing a partisan role or to prevent
political interference in the discharge of lawful functions had been
nullified by the state. The petition said that the state left no
stone unturned to ensure that the police organisation remained
as politicised as it was earlier in order to enable the political
machinery to use it as per their whims and fancies. Taking up the
petition, the court issued notice and fixed January 18 as the next
date of hearing in the matter.
9 January 2008
|
Read Also