Evidence of prosecution of police officer in criminal cases

crown prosecution service employ public prosecutors to prosecute criminals in open court. these criminals can be either common people or police officer.

 

in india prosecutors did not prosecute police officers in open court like common people. police officers are tried by departmental head.

 

i do not understand how crown prosecution is same as our departmental procedure.

 

will you please illustrate?

No you have not understood.

 

While committing any crime the police persons are also tried by the same court and same prosecutors and same jail is their abode. Whether the crime is related to duty, in private capacity or relating to corrupt behaviour. 

 

In departmental inquiry every Govt servant is tried in closed office as it is not a public trial.  There is no different procedure for police.  Generally the departmental proceedings in police are heard to be less accused-friendly.

 

In case the misconduct is also a criminal offence then depending upon the merits of the case the department is free to initiate departmental proceedings without waiting for the outcome of the criminal case.

 

If convicted by the criminal court there is no need to initiate departmental inquiry for dismissing an employee.

 

Your believe that police is a rosy service is misplaced.  Police has s reputation of not being a very good employer.  If you serve police take a guarantee of not being with family on any festival (being it yours or of other religion).

 

I do not think there can be any better words to describe the procedure to you.

 

 

i don't want you to explain the procedure to me. but you unprofessionally disclose the fault of the departmental procedure you advocate. there are 2 faults:

 

1] the cases is heard in a less accused-friendly way. this means that there is a tendency of police to take the allegation lightly and give lesser punishment to greater crime. i think this is what happens today. jail is only available if police disobeys politicians or their higher authorities.

 

2] the cases is tried based on the merit of offence. who decides this merit of offence? who decides which case is triable and which case is not? obviously the deparmental authority. it is like the boss of a gang of thieves tries his own subordinates for theft. isn't the analogy perfect?

 

3] the case is heard in a closed office. this means the case has never gone public. this is the violation of principles of fair trial as stated in both CrPC and international rules. a fair trial must be a public trial.

 

now let me show you how these faults will be removed if police are tried in open court.  first of all the court will deal the matter in a accused friendly way. the court impartially will decide the merit of case. this means that the victim will receive justice. also since the open court is a public place, the trial would be a fair trial.

 

this is what happening in britain or other countries i mentioned at the begining. so , my friend the departmental procedure is a faulty one.

You intention is pious.

 

If you understand the procedure of departmental proceedings you are is  a better position to suggest remedies.

 

Our Law does not permit application of Cr PC on departmental proceedings and departmental proceedings can never result in inprisonment. It is only the criminal proceedings which land a person in Jail.

In departmental procedings the accused is Govt servant {policeman in case of dDP in Police} the proceedings are less accused freindly.

 

All those policemen who escaped jail despite crime may or may nto be protected by politician and all who go to jail may have gone despite political protection.

 

If you want to knwo the detail. Pleae visit NHRC site. Seek RTI from Police on how many DPs were initiated and ho many policemen were caught.

 

 

 

 

Further, you can also visit Tihar jail meet the policemen jailed in CP shoot out case and ask them if their trial was in CrPC or not.

 

By the way what procedure is followed by British Govt for dismissing an employee (other than criminal proceeding).  it is their system only which out politicians are following as it suits ruling class.

i want to say that  the procedure against police in india SHOULD BE criminal proceeding rather than departmental proceedings.

 

in UK the procedings against police is a criminal one and not departmental one. that should be followed in india too in order to stop police terrorism.

 

regards.

Better see if you can get consittutional amenement. After 15.8.1947  UK law is o more applicable.

 

You mean to say that in UK criminal procedure code is invoked even for stoppage of one increment of salary of policeman or even for dismissing him from service?

 

The Criminal Procedure Code gives a large opportuinity to the accused policeman to delay the punishment and he will get acqauitted if 100% evidence is not produced.  But in departmental proceedings there is little scope for the accused policeman to delay the proceedings and punishment can be awarded on circumstantial evidence. In departmental proceedings the policeman cannot bring advocate to defend.  Do you want to save the erring policemen from this uncomfortable position.

 

if CrPC is followed how the accused policeman can delay the procedure? what do you mean by 100% evidence? is there percentage of evidence used in court? how this percentage is calculated?

yes,  In departmental proceedings the policeman cannot bring advocate to defend. but he will be tried by his own boss , the departmental head in a friendly way. how much impartiality will be there? the victim will not be present in that departmental proceeding. how much justice will be there?

 

in crpc the victim will be present. judges will be unfamiliar hence more impartial. lawyers should be granted on both side. so there is more justice in crpc than departmental proceeding.

currently in kolkata the DSP of park street police station forced his subordinate officer to commit suicide. a young man at the begining of his life died because of his own boss. departmental procedure is initiated against this DSP. the result?

the DSP went on vacation. do you want this kind of punishment for police people? what if a common man forced that subordinate officer to commit suicide? he will go to jail for 3 long years. understand the difference?

I see you have stop discourteous remarks on my experience in Disciplinary Proceedings. Your curiosities are deal as under :- 100% evidence means that court should be convinced that none else than the accused has done the crime. Cr PC is accused friendly and if a policeman is accused he can well exploit the procedure and knows how to delay the case. in departmental proceedings 100% evidence is not required. Mere circumstantial evidences have at times been held sufficient to dismiss and employee from service. In departmental proceedings the delay scope is much less. You are wrong to assume that boss will defend him. he has to nominated a Govt servant of his choice. The bosses in police are know to desert the subordinate once he is accused in depttll proceedings. The victim will be present as witness on days when he is required. The case is state v/s employee. Trial in departmental inquiry is not as fair for the accused as in open court. There are some cases where Gov employee can be dismissed without trial but there is no such provision in Cr PC which you are talking about. You do not know what is the plight of the Govt employee (more if he is policeman) who is accused of false allegation in departmental proceedings even if he is acquitted by departmental inquiry or later by court. In most of the cases a single inquiry results in total ruin of career. There is a financial breakdown loss of social respect (if suspended). Some innocent Gov employee had to fight right upto Supreme Court to prove that they are right. Under CrPC the courts can give punishment only those prescribed if the charge proves. But in departmental proceedings there are Nine punishments and the extreme penalty is dismissal which is generally awarded in case of allegation of dishonesty.

Just like the above case, read below another one where the Police instead of behaving like humble servants for protecting the law, is behaving like dictators and journalists are filming the entire matter as if a circus is being done for their entertainment -

Caught with boyfriend by cops, Jalandhar girl commits suicide
Bipin Bhardwaj/TNS

Jalandhar, August 30
An apparently overzealous drive of the city police against local Romeos went horribly wrong on Thursday when a girl traveling with her boyfriend in a car committed suicide after the police caught them in the presence of reporters and photographers.

Mini (not her real name), a BA-I student of the local SD College, threw herself before a train after her boyfriend was allegedly made to do sit-ups publicly by the police at Railway Road.

Commissioner of Police Gaurav Yadav has recommended an inquiry into the incident. The probe will cover the role of the local police as well as photojournalists.

Eyewitnesses said the boy while driving a car on noticing policemen closing in on him became nervous and hit a stationary vehicle. The police, which has launched a drive against eve teasers, sought out the couple and reportedly questioned them.

The boy was allegedly made to do sit-ups. The entire episode was reportedly filmed in the presence of Assistant Sub-Inspector Balwinder Kaur. The girl kept telling the police that she would commit suicide if her pictures went public.

When ignored, Mini walked to the railway station and threw herself before the DMU (Amritsar-Ambala). Assistant Inspector General, Railway Police, Davinder Singh Garcha said they had found her body. He said a case under Section 306 IPC (abetment to suicide) would be registered.

Mini's father, in his statement to the Railway Police, claimed her sandal had struck in the track while she was crossing it, which led to the "fatal accident".

Source :https://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120831/main7.htm

S/306 IPC? Trail by CrPC.

be it IPC or CrPC what will be the result? the accused police officer WILL GO TO VACATION. courtsy DEPARTMENTAL PROCEEDINGS.

 

shame shame india. no justice, no peace.

 

regards.

File PIL on this case