W.P.No.32054/2014 (GM-RES) ORDER. In Prakash Singh Vs. Union of India, (2006) 8 SCC 1, Apex Court issued several directions in the matter of police

Transcription

1 1 ANVGJ: W.P.No.32054/2014 (GM-RES) ORDER In Prakash Singh Vs. Union of India, (2006) 8 SCC 1, Apex Court issued several directions in the matter of police reform. One of the directions was, that there shall be a Police Complaints Authority at the District level to look into complaints against Police Officers of and up to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. Such Authorities were directed to take cognizance of allegations of serious misconduct by the police personnel which include incidents involving death, grievous hurt or rape in police custody, apart from enquiry into allegations of extortion, land/ house grabbing or any incident involving serious abuse of authority. It was made clear that the recommendations of the Complaints Authority, both at the District and State levels, for any action, departmental or criminal, against a delinquent police officer, shall be binding on the authority concerned. 2. This writ petition was filed on for issue of a writ in the nature of quo-warranto for removal of the 3 rd respondent as member of State Police Complaints Authority and for quashing of Annexure F.

2 2 3. On , after hearing learned advocates on both sides and having found that the issue raised in the petition requires deeper consideration, in view of the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court, more particularly, on account of the observations made in para 29, to the effect that it is not possible or proper to leave this matter only with an expression of this hope and to await developments further, the matter was heard at length. 4. The Government having passed an executive order vide Annexure A and the Ordinance No.2/2012, which stood repealed, on account of the passing and gazetting of Karnataka Act No.30 of 2012 vide Annexure C, finding that the mere passing of the legislation vide Annexure C itself is not sufficient and that there is need for the State to establish the Authorities at State and District levels and make them fully operational by keeping in view the observations made by the Apex Court and also an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, learned Addl. Advocate General, was requested to collect all the details relating to the establishment of State Police Complaints Authority and District Police Complaints Authorities and the infrastructure etc. provided for their functional efficacy.

3 3 5. On , noticing that respondent No.1 has not taken steps to establish District level Police Complaints Authorities, pursuant to the passing of Karnataka Act No.30 of 2012 and finding that there is urgent need to establish the Authorities both at the State and District levels and make them truly functional, Prl. Secretary to Government, Home Department, was directed to appear and state the steps taken to achieve the object behind the order passed by the Apex Court in the case of PRAKASH SINGH (supra) and the enactment of Act No.30 of On , by noticing the steps taken the submissions made by the learned Addl. Advocate General and finding that the State has not lived up to the expectations and has failed to constitute the District Police Complaints Authorities, the case was adjourned for furnishing the calendar, with regard to constitution of Police Complaints Authorities. 7. On , affidavit cum undertaking, furnishing the calendar with regard to constitution of District Police Complaints Authorities, filed by the Addl. Chief Secretary to Government, Dept. of Home, was taken on record. Since certain steps had been taken to constitute the complaints

4 4 Authorities at the District level, the case was adjourned, to place on record the two Notifications, stated in para 4 and 5 of the affidavit filed. 8. On , submission made by the learned AAG, that on , Notifications were issued by the Government, in exercise of the power conferred by S.20(D) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, constituting Dist. Police Complaints Authorities, with the Chairman and retired Civil Servant and naming the Member Secretaries was recorded. Learned AAG was directed to place on record, the Notifications issued, constituting the Dist. Police Complaints Authorities with the list of Chairmen and Members. 9. An affidavit of Sri S.K. Pattanayak, Addl. Chief Secretary to Government, Department of Home, Government of Karnataka, filed on , by the learned AAG towards compliance of the order passed on , was taken on record. On , State Government was directed to furnish the list of Dist. Level Police Complaints Authorities and all the related particulars. It was observed that the Hon ble Karnataka Lokayukta may respond positively to the request made by the State Government with regard to his nominees in

5 5 the Search Committee for appointment of Member/s Civil Society to the Dist. Police Complaints Authorities. 10. Sri A.G. Shivanna, learned AAG, today, filed a report with regard to the Dist. Police Complaints Authorities established by the Government, infrastructure provided and also the details of the complaints received and status of the cases. 11. Heard Sri A.G. Shivanna and perused the said report. 12. Out of the nine District Authorities coming within the jurisdiction of the Regional Commissioner, Bengaluru Division, six complaints have been received in Bengaluru Urban and Bengaluru Rural District. Out of the seven Districts Authorities coming within the jurisdiction of the Regional Commissioner, Belagavi, two complaints each, were received in Belagavi, Vijayapura, Bagalkot, Dharwad, Gadag, Haveri, Dakshina Kannada and Karwar Districts. In Mysuru Division, five complaints have been received. No complaint/s have been received by the Regional Commissioner, Kalaburagi Division, within whose jurisdiction, six Districts fall.

6 6 13. The laudable object behind the constitution of the complaints Authorities, in pursuance of the decision in PRAKASH SINGH (supra), has not been achieved, which becomes clear from the statistics provided, noticed supra. 14. In KHATRI AND OTHERS (II) Vs. STATE OF BIHAR, (1981) 1 SCC 627, Apex Court has observed as follows: 6..It is common knowledge that, about 70 per cent of the people in the rural areas are illiterate and even more than that percentage of people are not aware of the rights conferred upon them by law. There is so much lack of legal awareness that it has always been recognised as one of the principle items of the programme of the legal aid movement in this Country to promote legal literacy. It would make a mockery of legal aid if it were to be left to a poor ignorant and illiterate accused to ask for free legal services. Legal aid would become merely a paper promise and it would fail of its purpose. (emphasis supplied) 15. In INDIAN COUNCIL FOR ENVIRO-LEGAL ACTION Vs. UNION OF INDIA, (1996) 5 SCC 281, Apex Court has held as follows: 26. Enactment of a law, but tolerating its infringement, is worse than not enacting law at all. The continued infringement of law, over a period of time, is made possible by adoption of such means which are best known to the violators of law. Continued tolerance of such violations of law not only renders legal provisions nugatory but such tolerance by the enforcement authorities encourages lawlessness and adoption of means

7 7 which cannot, or ought not to, be tolerated in any civilized society. Law should not only be meant for the law abiding but is meant to be obeyed by all for whom it has been enacted. A law is usually enacted because the legislature feels that it is necessary. It is with a view to protect and preserve the environment and save it for the future generations and to ensure good quality of life that the Parliament enacted the anti-pollution Laws, namely, the Water Act, Air Act and the Environment (Protection) Act, These Acts and Rules framed and Notification issued thereunder contain provisions which prohibit and/or regulate certain activities with a view to protect and preserve the environment. When a law is enacted containing some provisions which prohibits certain types of activities, then, it is of utmost importance that such legal provisions are effectively enforced. If a law is enacted but is not being voluntarily obeyed, then, it has to be enforced. Otherwise, infringement of law, which is actively or passively condoned for personal gain, will be encouraged which will in turn lead to a lawless society. Violation of anti - pollution laws not only adversely affects the existing quality of life but the nonenforcement of the legal provisions often results in ecological imbalance and degradation of environment, the adverse affect of which will have to be borne by the future generations. 27. The present case also shows that having issued the main Notification, no follow - up action was taken either by the coastal States and Union Territories or by the Central Government. The provisions of the main Notification appear to have been ignored and, possibly, violated with impunity. The coastal States and Union Territory administrations were required to prepare Management Plans within a period of one year from the date of the Notification but this was not done. The Central Government was to approve the plans which were to be prepared but it did not appear to have reminded any of the coastal States or the Union Territory administrations that the plans had not been received by it.

8 8 Clause 4 of the main Notification required the Central Government and the State Governments as well as Union Territory administrations to monitor and enforce the provisions of the main Notification, but no effective steps appear to have been taken and this is what led to the filing of the present writ petition. (emphasis supplied) 15. That on account of public being unaware of the constitution of the Police Complaints Authorities, both at the District and State levels, complaints seeking redressal of grievances appear to have not been lodged. The object behind the establishment of Police Complaints Authorities, as per the directions of the Apex Court, in the decision noticed supra, has not been achieved. The money spent from the State exchequer towards the establishment and maintenance of the Police Complaints Authorities should enure to the benefit of the citizens. For achieving the object behind the establishment of the said Authorities, there is need to broadcast or publish in a recognizable way, so that all men may know, for what purpose the Police Complaints Authorities have been established. The Government should take measures through customary channels and give wide publicity with regard to the purpose for which the Police Complaints Authorities have been established and their powers.

9 9 16. In view of the above, it is hereby directed as follows: (i) Government of Karnataka shall take immediate steps to broadcast / publish in recognizable way the establishment of the Police Complaints Authorities at the State and District levels. (ii) Free legal aid to the poor and marginalized members of the society having been viewed as a tool to empower them to use the power of law to advance their rights and interests as citizens and as economic actors, the Parliament having enacted the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, in order to give effect to Article 39-A of the Constitution, promoting legal literacy and conducting legal awareness programmes being the functions of the legal services institutions, at the Taluk, District and State levels, Karnataka Legal Services Authority shall organize meetings by involving the Judicial Officers, Police Authorities Human Rights activists and others, in promoting the legal literacy and conducting legal awareness programmes with regard to the purpose of establishment of the Police Complaints Authorities and their powers. (iii) Steps be taken by the concerned, to webhost the information relating to the establishment and functioning of the Police Complaints Authorities, as noted above. The webhosting

10 10 shall be done in the websites of Karnataka State Government, Karnataka Police, Human Rights Commission and the Karnataka Legal Services Authority. Copy of this order be sent to (i) the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka; (ii) the Secretary, Karnataka Legal Services Authority; and (iii) the Registrar, Karnataka State Human Rights Commission, to ensure compliance. A copy of this order be made available to Sri A.G. Shivanna, learned Addl. Advocate General. orders. Re-list after 6 weeks for filing status report and further Sd/- (A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA) JUDGE sac*