Rights Activism Against Skewed Family Laws Saturday, January 28, 2012 Police cant interfere in civil matters The order is from AP High Court. As the 498a matter is a matrimonial dispute. Henc police cant interefere. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ABSTRACT Police – Committees to monitor the cases of interference of police in Civil isputes - Constituted – Orders – Issued. ____________________________________________________ HOME (PS&C.A2) DEPARTMENT G.O.Ms.No. 288 Dated:06.11.2010 Read the following: 1. From the Hon’ble High Court, A.P., Hyderabad. orders dt: 03.09.2010 in W.P.No. 5473 of 2010 filed by Smt. Farhat Begum W/o Naseeruddin Hasmi, Hyderabad. 2. From the D.G.P., A.P., Hyderabad, Lr.Rc.No. 494/Legis-1/2010, dated: 24.9.2010 and 28.9.2010. *** ORDER: In the reference 2nd read above, the Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, has stated that the Hon’ble High Court, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad have taken a serious view of interference of police in civil disputes and directed the State Government to issue necessary instructions laying down clear modalities in order to see that immediate relief is given to the victim and appropriate action is taken against the erring police officer where police interference in civil disputes is established. The Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, while submitting a detailed report has requested for necessary orders in the matter. 2. Inspite of clear instructions in APPM Vol-1 in order No. 322-1 and specific instructions from the office of the Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, from time to time in the matter, many instances of Police Officers interfering in Civil disputes are brought to the notice of the Government. 3. Government, after careful examination of the matter and keeping in view the orders of the Hon’ble High Court, vide reference 1st read above, hereby constitute the following committees to monitor the cases of interference of police in Civil disputes. District Level Committee 1) Inspector General of Police/ Deputy - Chairman Inspector General of Police of the Range concerned 2) Superintendent of Police concerned - Member 3) Officer on Special Duty concerned - Member Committee at Commissionerate Level a) For Police Commissionerates Visakhapatnam and Vijayawada: 1) Commissioner of Police concerned - Chairman 2) Deputy Commissioner of Police concerned - Member 3) Addl Deputy Commissioner of Police concerned - Member b) For Police Commissionerate, Hyderabad: 1) Commissioner of Police - Chairman 2) Addl Commissioner of Police, Co-ordination - Member 3) Addl Commissioner of Police, Crimes - Member c) For Police Commissionerate, Cyberabad: 1) Commissioner of Police - Chairman 2) Deputy Commissioner of Police, Admn - Member 3) Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crimes - Member 4. The above Committees, on receipt of complaints on Police interference in Civil disputes, should immediately enquire into the matter not later than 15 days from the date of receipt of the complaint in this regard. During the process of enquiry the complainant shall be heard and so also, the officer against whom such a complaint is made. After such enquiry, if the complaint is not substantiated the matter shall be closed. Wherever police interference in Civil disputes is established, the committees should process the proposals to the appropriate authority for consequential action on the erring police personnel. 5. The Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, is requested to take necessary further action accordingly and also see that the orders are implemented scrupulously. (BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH) P. GAUTAM KUMAR PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT To The Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. (with a request to Communicate the orders on the members of the Committees) The Inspector General of Police /Deputy Inspector General of Police of all Ranges in the State All the Superintendent of Police in the State. The Commissioners of Police Hyderabad, Cyberabad, Visakhapatnam and Vijayawada. Copy to: The O/o the Learned Advocate General, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. C.No.27068/PSC/A2/2010. SF/SC. // FORWARDED :: BY ORDER // SECTION OFFICER Posted by Anantha Madhav at 11:52 PM Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest Labels: POLICE No comments: Post a Comment Newer Post Older Post Home Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom) Disclaimer If the contents in this blog is incorrect or considered to be legal advice, nor is the intent to slander or defame anyone or any institution, however, constitute a set of opinions and observations, based on what has been read or heard in the media or on the Internet and other sources of legal information. What ever action or umbrage you may take or not take, is your choice and at your risk. The writer disclaims all liabilities, legal or otherwise, that may arise for any reason whatsoever. The Authorities if reproduced in any of messages then they are reproduced in accordance with S. 52 (q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judicial information sites & other websites. Search This Blog Labels 498a (3) 498a & Dowry gross abuse judgments (1) 498a acquittal judgments (7) 498a Cruelty not proven judgments (3) 498a Judgments - Directions to handle 498a/Criminal cases (1) 498a Jurisdiction Judgments (9) ACB Complaint against 498a Father-in-law(FIL) or Mother-in-Law(MIL) (1) Alimony Judgments (1) ANDHRA PRADESH HINDU MARRIAGES RULES (4) BAIL (11) CCA Rules (1) CIC Decisions (8) CIC Decisions against Public Authority to comply with 4(1)( b) of RTI (1) CIC decisions on RTI against Courts (3) Complaints and Second Appeals to Information Commission (4) concilliation (1) condone delay judgments (1) consumer court judgments under RTI (1) CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT UNDER RTI (1) contempt of court (2) Court Process Language (1) Cruelty Judgments (2) Daughter-in-law has no right on in-laws (Father-in-Law or Mother-in-Law) self acquired Property (3) Decisions against TEP(Tax evsion Petition) (9) Decisions on Call Records (7) Disciplinary Complaint against 498a Father-in-law(FIL) or Mother-in-Law(MIL) (1) Divorce Judgments (50) Dowry Prohibition Act (1) Dowry Prohibition Rules 1985 (1) DP3 Complaint against Father-in-Law and Mother-in-Law or [ Dowry Givers and Abettors] to Court (1) DP3 Complaint against Father-in-Law and Mother-in-Law; Dowry Givers and Abettors (1) DP3 Judgments - Dowry giving is an Offence. (1) Family Law (7) FRAMING CHARGES BY A DISCIPLINARY AUTHOURITY (1) Government Orders(GOs) for violation of APCS(Conduct) Rules 1964 (2) innocent until proven guilty (Presumption of innocence) - Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462 (1) IPC (1) Judgment on ex parte (1) Judgment on Information Technology Act (1) Judgments - Directions to handle 498a Criminal cases (7) judgments - dowry proof (dowry evidence) required for false claims (3) Judgments - not 498a allegations (10) Judgments - Supreme Court rulings against POLICE to handle Criminal cases in terms of investigation u/s 156(3) (1) judgments against legal profession (lawyers / Advocates / legal practitioners) (6) judgments on 498a allegations (1) judgments on gross abuse of dowry and 498a (1) Judgments on Regsitration of FIR (2) Judgments on Right to Know Information (RTI) (9) Lawyer - Advocate - Vakil - Pleader (2) Legal Language (5) Maintenance Judgments (35) Mediation (1) Passport cannot be impounded by Police or Court (2) Perjury judgments (4) PIO has to follow third party procedure under section 11 of RTI (1) POLICE (4) Public Interest Decisions (3) Quotes on Right to know Information (1) Recorded-conversation-on-CD-is-admissible-evidence-in-Family (1) Rights of Accused-Victim (7) RTI - Appeals (2) RTI ACT - 2005 (4) RTI on 498a wife Family(FIL or MIL) (2) RTI on third party objections. (1) RTI Templates (9) RTI to Police Dept. (6) RTI under Consumer Protection Act (RTI under CPAct) (RTI under CPA) (1) TEP (Tax evasion Petition) against 498a FIL (Father-in-law) and MIL (Mother-in-law) (1) third party decisions (3) Vigilance Complaint against 498a Father-in-law(FIL) or Mother-in-Law(MIL) (1) Vigilance Complaint against Government 498a Father-in-law or Mother-in-Law (1) Void marriage (1) Total Pageviews Sparkline 114,322 feedjit Followers Blog Archive ► 2014 (8) ► 2013 (12) ▼ 2012 (241) ► December (1) ► October (2) ► August (1) ► July (75) ► June (6) ► May (20) ► April (22) ► March (21) ► February (21) ▼ January (72) Directions for Criminal Courts handling Bail appli... Directions to POLICE from register of FIR till fil... Guidelines to Lawyers, Police and Courts dealing 4... Bail Application format Identity not required to get reply by the PIO Right to know Information - Quotes 498a FIR Quash - Sangeetha Vs State Of Delhi - Not... Hearing order must be given only by First Appellat... First Appeal Authourity must give a hearing order RTI to 498a FIL or MIL Office U/s 4(1)(b) RTI on 498a Father-in-law or 498a Mother-in-law RTI on 498a FIR for Income Details of 498a FIL or ... RTI on 498a for flase dowry claims by wife ISSUING CHARGE SHEET IN A DISCIPLINARY ENQUIRY Directions to POLICE dealing 498a cases - D.K. BAS... Directions to POLICE dealing 498a cases - Sushil K... Directions to POLICE dealing 498a cases - Narender... Directions to POLICE/INVESTIGATION OFFICER & CRIMI... Code of Conduct for the Police in India Decision on Call Records - Manoj Mehta Vs DCP - Ap... Decision on Call Records - Ranjit Bhattacharjee Vs... Decision on Call Records - Rajendra Yadav Vs - J.B... Decision on Call Records - Shama Praveen Vs Delhi ... Decision on Call Records - Asha Vs DCP - No. CIC/... Police cant interfere in civil matters 498A IPC is not a continuing offence Rights of Victim in Criminal Justice dowry evidence required - Gopal Vs State of Rajast... dowry evidence required - Srinivasulu Vs State of ... Dowry evidence required - Narender Kumar & Anr Vs ... A.P. Dowry Circular Memo No 6183/Ser.C/2006-2 Maintenance of Lists of Presents To The Bride And ... No 498a allegations - Sarla Prabhakar Waghmare Vs ... No 498a allegations - NARAYAN GANESH DASTANE Vs SU... second (2nd) ‘knot’ not cruelty against First (1st... no 498a allegations - GIRDHAR SHANKAR TAWADE Vs ST... no 498a allegations - Mohd. Hoshan Vs State of And... no 498a allegations - STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs... no 498a jurisdiction - Sonu and Ors. Vs Govt. of N... no 498a jurisdiction - SATVINDER KAUR Vs STATE (G... no 498a jurisdiction - Manish Ratan Vs State of Ma... no 498a jurisdiction - Bimla Rawal and Ors Vs Stat... No 498a jurisdiction - Niraj Trivedi Vs State of B... no 498a jurisdiction - Balchand & Poonam Chand Chh... No 498a jurisdiction - Y. Abraham Ajith & Ors. Vs... No 498a jurisdiction - Bhura Ram and Ors Vs State ... No 498a jurisdiction - Naushad Alam Vs Jharkand RTI on the reply by PIO with third party objection... Divorce to wife - Seema Vs Alkesh Divorce to wife, as Cruetly to husband by wife - S... No Divorce for irretrievable breakdown of marriage... Application for Registration of Hindu Marriage Forms/Petition to initiate court procedings in Dis... A.P. HIGH COURT RULES TO REGULATE PROCEEDINGS UNDE... REGISTRATION OF HINDU MARRIAGES UNDER HMA, 1955. 498a acquittal judgment - Girdhar Shankar Tawade V... Shoba Rani Vs Madhukar Reddy - judgment on 498a al... Not 498a - M. Srinivasulu Vs State of Andhra Prade... Preeti Gupta Vs State of Jharkhand & Anr. - 498a ... Cruelty not proven - Sirajmohmedkhan Janmohamadkha... Cruelty not proven judgment - Parveen Mehta Vs Ind... Divorce to wife, for Cruelty by wife - G.V.N. Kame... Cruelty not proven - Narender Kumar & Anr. Vs Del... What is 498a Useful Citations of Maintenance consumer notice for RTI deficiency in service by t... witten arguments for 3rd party and compliance of p... Accused(A1) can not be prosectued on vague allegat... RTI reply from A.P. POLICE Dept for accused rights... Fight till you succeed IPC - ready reckoner Court process language ► 2011 (46) ► 2010 (27) Watermark template. Powered by Blogger.
Posted on: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 10:59:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015