|
|
|
| NEWS > 07 April 2007 |
Other related articles:
British, American Muslims Clai
Eight British and American Shiite Muslims who said they were arrested and tortured by religious police as they prayed during a pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia called Friday for a full inquiry into their ordeal.
The group, some of Iraqi descent and aged between 16 and 26, told a London news conference they had been detained and beaten by police during their visit to holy city of Mecca.
One member of the group is Amir Taqi, the 23-year-old son of Ridha Jawad Taqi, a senior Iraqi lawmaker in the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq, the country's biggest Shiite political party.
<... Read more
|
 Article sourced from
|
|
News Agency of Kashmir, Naknew
07 April 2007
This article appeared in the above title/site.
To view it in its entirity click this link.
|
|
Police officer found guilty of
State Accountability Commission today recommended yet another termination and this time of Station House Officer (SHO) Sunderbani, who was found guilty of demanding and accepting bribe from a doctor.
The commission asked the state government to take action against the SHO under rule 30 of the Jammu and Kashmir civil services (classification, control and appeal) rules 1956 by dismissing him from the services of the state and by initiating of criminal prosecution against him.
The recommendations were passed by the commission in a complaint filed by Brig Mohan Datta wherein the officer was accused of favoritism, corruption, high handedness and violation of Supreme courts directions
The state accountability commission after through enquiry held the allegations proved to warrant the extreme punishment against the police officer, sources told News Agency of Kashmir.
The complainant had alleged that on May 11, 2005 his son Dr Anil Data, registered medical practitioner in homeopathy, was arrested in FIR No 17/05, under sections 417,420 and 468 of RPC alleging therein that the doctor was running his ultrasound clinic without a valid License and by impersonating as sinologist/Radiologist by using the letter pad and sign board and name of one Dr R K Gupta to cheat the innocent persons.
The main grievance of the complainant projected before the commission was that after arrest of his son the respondent SHO, Jamrodh Singh demanded rupees seventy thousand as a bribe and subjected the accused to third degree torture in case the money was not paid.
During enquiry it was admitted by the SHO that immediately after arrest of Dr Anil his Ultra sound center was sealed and was hand coughed and paraded through the open Bazar while being taken to the police lock-up.
No letter pad or sign board was seized and no patient was produced to establish that Dr Anil was conducting sex-determination or sonographic test.
The demand of rupees seventy thousand and acceptance of actual amount of rupees fifty seven thousand bribe by the said SHO was substantially proved before the commission by the complainant.
“Over all conduct of the respondent has been to involve the complainant’s son in a non-bailable offence and that too with-out a formal complaint from Dr R K Gupta, with out recording his statement and without supporting evidence of the alleged forgery, without recording the statements of the witnesses under section 161 of CrPC and without recording the statements of any of the persons who had allegedly complained of sex determination test by Dr Anil Dutt and without producing even the Naib Tehsildar, Executive Magistrate accompanying the raiding party”, the commission observed.
It was further observed that the act of respondent as established in this case amount to mal-administration on his part in that the acts proved against him were illegal, un-reasonable, unjust and oppressive.
“The commission was of the opinion that the allegations leveled against the respondent are fully made out, therefore the terms of section 21 of the SAC act that the recommendation is made to competent authority to take action against the said SHO under rule 30 of the Jammu and Kashmir civil services (classification, control and appeal) rules 1956 by dismissing him from the services of the state and by launching criminal prosecution against him for having demanded and accepted illegal gratification of rupees fifty seven thousand”, the commission recommended.
|
| |
 EiP Comments:
|
|---|
|
| |
* We have no wish to infringe the copyright of any newspaper or periodical. If you feel that we have done so then please contact us with the details and we will remove the article. The articles republished on this site are provided for the purposes of research , private study, criticism , review, and the reporting of current events' We have no wish to infringe the copyright of any newspaper , periodical or other works. If you feel that we have done so then please contact us with the details and where necessary we will remove the work concerned.
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
 |
Ethics in Policing, based in the UK, provide information and advice about the following:
Policing Research | Police News articles | Police Corruption | International Policing | Police Web Sites | Police Forum | Policing Ethics | Police Journals | Police Publications |
|
| |
|
