CoP must appear Jan. 17: HC
Tags:
Chennai: The Madras high court on Friday directed city police commissioner S. George to appear before the court on January 17 after dispensing with his personal appearance on Friday.
Justice A Arumughaswamy had on January 10 castigated the commissioner for not taking action on a cheating complaint and directed him to appear before the court on Friday to explain the case. When the matter came up for hearing on Friday, advocate general A Navaneethakrishnan submitted that Mr George could not appear as he was supervising the security arrangements for a meeting of a Muslim organisation in the city.
Dispensing with the commissioner’s appearance for the day, the judge said he must appear on January 17. When advocate general responded saying the commissioner might not be able to appear even on that day as he would be busy with official work, the judge wondered how anyone could say he would get busy next week.
Pointing out that a policeman’s job was 24-hour responsibility and he must come whenever required, he said the court had just two questions—what action was taken against policemen who did not obey court orders in this land case and why was the commissioner not appearing in court.
Police duty is 24x7: HC judge
Pointing out that a policeman’s job was 24-hour responsibility, Justice A. Arumughaswamy of the Madras high court said while directing the Commissioner of Police (COP), Chennai, S. George, to appear before the court on January 17, that an officer must come whenever he was required to come.
The judge said he needed answers for two questions. What action had been taken against the police personnel who did not obey court orders pertaining to a land transaction and why the commissioner was not appearing in court. His criticism was directed at the erring police and not at the government, the judge clarified.
Advocate general A. Navaneethakrishnan said the city police would take appropriate action against the erring police officers and report the development to the court.
The judge then posted to January 17 further hearing of the petition from one D. Sridhar, which sought a transfer of the investigation from the inspector of police, CCB, to any other investigating agency.
The petitioner contended that he had entered into a sale agreement with S. Rajamani, who represented himself as the managing director of M/s Popular Forge (Madras) Private Limited, for land measuring 4,800 sq.ft in Ekkattuthangal on January 25, 2002, and had paid `13 lakh for the land.
As Rajamani and the company evaded executing the sale deed, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the COP on April 11, 2005. Despite two high court orders and directions from the magistrate court, the city police sought to close it as a civil dispute and as mistake of fact. Hence, he filed the present petition, Sridhar said.
Post new comment