Six UP policemen get two-yr jail in illegal confinement case
Monday, July 05, 2010
New Delhi: A Delhi court on Monday sentenced six Uttar Pradesh police personnel, including a Superintendent of Police, to two years of imprisonment each for illegally confining the relatives of a man who had married a girl against the wishes of her family in 1994.
Additional Sessions Judge Poonam Chaudhary also imposed a fine of Rs 15,000 each on convict Satpal Singh, the then SHO, Sukhpal Singh and Satbir Singh, both constables, and Rs 6,000 on AK Singh, the SP.
New Delhi: A Delhi court on Monday sentenced six Uttar Pradesh police personnel, including a Superintendent of Police, to two years of imprisonment each for illegally confining the relatives of a man who had married a girl against the wishes of her family in 1994.
Additional Sessions Judge Poonam Chaudhary also imposed a fine of Rs 15,000 each on convict Satpal Singh, the then SHO, Sukhpal Singh and Satbir Singh, both constables, and Rs 6,000 on AK Singh, the SP.
It imposed a fine of Rs 9,000 each on two women police constables Duija Yadav and Promila J Masih who were convicted for their role in preparing fake arrest memo in order to produce false evidence in the matter.
All the six police personnel were held guilty under various sections of the IPC including 193 (punishment for false evidence), 195 (fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction) and 348 (wrongful confinement to extort confession) on May 24.
During the argument on the quantum of sentence, CBI prosecutor Anil Tanwar had sought severe punishment against the convicts as they were police officers and acted in violation of law by preparing false recovery memos and illegally detaining the victims.
The convicts' counsels on the other hand opposed CBI's plea claiming that the policemen's action was bonafide as an FIR was registered in the matter.
They appealed to the court to take a lenient view on the ground that the accused were public servants.
The convicted police officers had on August 13, 1994 picked up businessman Raj Pal Dhall and three of his relatives including a woman from their home and allegedly tortured them to extort "confessions".
The police action had come after a case was lodged with Kavi Nagar police station against Dhall's son Atul Dhall who had eloped with Geeta, a neighbourhood girl, from Ghaziabad and married her at a temple in Delhi on August 12, 1994.
The case was transferred to CBI on an order of the Supreme Court on November seven, 1994. The trial against the accused police officers and the girl Geeta and her father Khem Raj Ahuja initially took place at Dehradun and later transferred to Delhi.
"Prosecution has succeeded in proving that on August 13, 1994, the accused entered into criminal conspiracy to fabricate false evidence against complainant Dhall and his family members with intention to use against them in a case registered by Ahuja," the ASJ had said in a 86-page judgement convicting the police personnel.
During the arguments, Special Public Prosecutor had alleged that the police officers prepared a fake arrest memo of the girl and the boy even though the couple had surrendered at Kavi Nagar police station on the next day of their marriage after coming to know that Dhall's family members have been picked up by them.
He also charged the family members with torturing Dhall's family members.
80-year-old Dhall, who had to leave his factory and business at Ghaziabad after registration of the case, expressed satisfaction over the court's judgement.
"We will approach higher courts to seek compensation for the mental trauma we have undergone," Dhall told reporters outside the courtroom.
Earlier, in its judgement, the court had acquitted Geeta of all charges finding no evidence against her. Geeta's father, also an accused, had died during the trial.
PTI
http://www.zeenews.com/news638785.html
All the six police personnel were held guilty under various sections of the IPC including 193 (punishment for false evidence), 195 (fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction) and 348 (wrongful confinement to extort confession) on May 24.
During the argument on the quantum of sentence, CBI prosecutor Anil Tanwar had sought severe punishment against the convicts as they were police officers and acted in violation of law by preparing false recovery memos and illegally detaining the victims.
The convicts' counsels on the other hand opposed CBI's plea claiming that the policemen's action was bonafide as an FIR was registered in the matter.
They appealed to the court to take a lenient view on the ground that the accused were public servants.
The convicted police officers had on August 13, 1994 picked up businessman Raj Pal Dhall and three of his relatives including a woman from their home and allegedly tortured them to extort "confessions".
The police action had come after a case was lodged with Kavi Nagar police station against Dhall's son Atul Dhall who had eloped with Geeta, a neighbourhood girl, from Ghaziabad and married her at a temple in Delhi on August 12, 1994.
The case was transferred to CBI on an order of the Supreme Court on November seven, 1994. The trial against the accused police officers and the girl Geeta and her father Khem Raj Ahuja initially took place at Dehradun and later transferred to Delhi.
"Prosecution has succeeded in proving that on August 13, 1994, the accused entered into criminal conspiracy to fabricate false evidence against complainant Dhall and his family members with intention to use against them in a case registered by Ahuja," the ASJ had said in a 86-page judgement convicting the police personnel.
During the arguments, Special Public Prosecutor had alleged that the police officers prepared a fake arrest memo of the girl and the boy even though the couple had surrendered at Kavi Nagar police station on the next day of their marriage after coming to know that Dhall's family members have been picked up by them.
He also charged the family members with torturing Dhall's family members.
80-year-old Dhall, who had to leave his factory and business at Ghaziabad after registration of the case, expressed satisfaction over the court's judgement.
"We will approach higher courts to seek compensation for the mental trauma we have undergone," Dhall told reporters outside the courtroom.
Earlier, in its judgement, the court had acquitted Geeta of all charges finding no evidence against her. Geeta's father, also an accused, had died during the trial.
PTI
http://www.zeenews.com/news638785.html
Labels: Additional Sessions Judge Poonam Chaudhary, constables Sukhpal Singh and Satbir Singh, illegal confinement case, Satpal Singh SHO, women police constables Duija Yadav and Promila J Masih
posted by Develop India at
1:30 AM
1 Comments:
Revered Lord,
I humbly submit before you the fact that SHRC Tamil Nadu does violate Human Rights and sucks the blood of aged senior women.
I humbly submit that SHRC today dismissed the case 991/08/HM1against 11 police personnel from eight police jurisdictions after we had submitted RTI documentary evidences with proof of affidavit and eye witnesses in aroun 14 hearings. The case was inquired by Member 1 and he scolded and shouted at my aged mother in open court which affected her dignity and modesty. The case then got transferred to Member 2, he gave only 24 hours time to appear travelling 660 KMs with my aged retired parents and my aunty. We could not and we promptly informed the Commission thru registered post and telegram but SHRC ignored it. Again, Member 2 assigned quick hearing in just 10 days without informing us and he marked absent and dismissed as we absent. All such injustice have been brought to the notice The Chair Person All know that this case has been proven beyond reasonable doubts!!. I am writing all these to humbly sumbit that Human rights commission itself violates human rights! It is clear elder abuse of in the name of Human Rights
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home