Join in At Facebook
"Corruption ... Let's fight NOW"
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=3078097159Unlawful chowky at Juhu P.L.E.A.D. needs funds, to contribute ...Click here Demolition ordered earlier ... http://www.plead.in/howmany.htm
______________________________________________________
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
DISTRICT : MUMBAI
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.: 101 of 2008
IN
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. : 1679 OF 2007
Indur Kartar Chhugani ….Petitioner
Age : 59 years, Occ. : Business,
R/o. : 501-502, Pinky Panorama CHS Ltd.
6th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai - 400 052.
V E R S U S
1. The State of Maharashtra ….Respondents
At the instance of
Addl. Chief Secretary, Home Department,
Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya,
Mumbai;
2. The Commissioner of Police, Mumbai
Police Commissionerate Compound,
Opp. : Crawford Market, Mumbai &
3. The Municipal Commissioner, Mumbai
BrihanMumbai Municipal Corporation,
Opp. : Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus,
Mumbai.
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLES 14, 19 & 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
To,
The Honourable the Chief Justice and
other Puisne Judges of this Hon’ble
High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
Humble Petition of the Petitioner abovenamed :
Most Respectfully Sheweth :
1. On 4th May 2007, a leading newspaper Mumbai Mirror published a story on the frontpage about police chowkies pilfering power.And next day again they published the follow up story. Please refer EXH”C” in original petition. However the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai who is head of the police force in Mumbai did not do anything to take action, against the police officers responsible for these acts. The Supreme Court orders in CASE NO: Appeal (crl.) 206 of 2008 arising from Special Leave Petition (Crl.) NO. 1719 OF 2006: Petitioner Som Mittal Vs Respondent Government of Karnataka, has upheld prosecution of the highest official of the organization, for a act by some official, in charge of transporting employees to work and back to home.
2. On 24th October 2007, the Public Prosecutor Mr Borulkar made a commitment “that he would get all the electric connections to the police station as well as police chowkies inspected by the Electrical Inspector appointed under the Electricity Act, 2003” and will produce a report from the electrical inspector, on the next date 9th January 2008, this has not been done yet. Also the list of police officers involved in theft of electric power was to be provided, along with the names of all Sr Police Inspectors under whom these unlawful acts were committed. No such list has been provided yet. This is clearly contempt of the highest court in the state of Maharashtra.
3. On 24th October 2007, the Public Prosecutor had requested time of 3 months, to demolish or regularize the 269 illegal chowkies. This court allowed 11 weeks. Also they were to provide on the next date, which was after 11 weeks, on 9th January 2008, the list of 269 unlawfully constructed chowkies and the names of the sponsorer of each of these chowky. No such information has still been furnished to this honourable court. This information is of utmost importance, as the truth will come out, as to what kind of people, the police is associated with. This refusal to provide information is clearly contempt of the highest court in the state of Maharashtra.
4. On 24th October 2007 , this Honourable court had asked for a compliance report on illegal chowkies, throughout the State by 9th January 2008. No compliance report has been filed, till date, by the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, clearly demonstrating the contempt with which the police department and the home ministry treat the orders of this honourable court, which is the highest court in the state..
5. 0n January 25, 2008 an affidavit was filed by the Jt commissioner of Police and Advocate General Mr Ravi Kadam asked for 6 months to demolish 137 illegal chowkies on footpaths. This honourable court desired to watch the progress of demolition of these illegal chowkies and listed the matter after 5 weeks on 29th February 2008. Despite directions of this honourable court, to immediately demolish all abandoned chowkies across Mumbai, the police have not come up with any statistics, clearly showing utter contempt for the court orders. These chowkies are used for only unlawful activities and are literally safe places, where any contraband can be stored, or person can be hidden, without any fear of discovery by any individual or any government agency. The addresses of all such chowkies have not been provided till date.
6. The highest Police officials are treating this honourable court, as a church, where they have made confessions about committing unlawful acts and assume they are absolved of the sins.
7. The petitioner has made efforts to obtain the same information (as detailed in above paras), through the Right to Information Act application on 1-2-2008, but the reply received is “that since the case regarding Chowkies is being heard in the high court, no information will be given”. Attached is My RTI application and their reply EXH “A “
8. While the police chowky outside Khar Station was demolished on 15th January 2008, the foundation 12ft X 12 ft and 30 inches high has been left intact, which continues to be an impediment to the traffic. The compliance report filed through an affidavit by Sr Inspector, Khar Police Station on 17-1-2008 is thus false. This Sr Inspector has earlier provided false Information under the RTI act, regarding name of sponsor’s and regarding illegal water connection for the beat chowkies. This is clearly contempt of the highest court in the state of Maharashtra.
9. The air-conditioned beat chowky, constructed at Juhu beach is in clear violations of the laws enacted for Coastal Regulation Zone and without any Muncipal permission, it is built by a very Sr Police official Addl. Commissioner of Police Mr. Arup Patnaik, whose name is mentioned on the granite plaque fixed at the chowky. This chowky is financed by people, considered as scum of the society. It is of utmost importance, that Mr Arup Patnaik informs the court of the names of the people who have financed it, along with their business details and Pan Cards. Attached is picture as EXH “B “.
10. Since the order of 24th October 2007 allows me to bring additional facts to the notice of the court. I hereby bring some shocking facts to the courts notice about actions of Joint Commissioner of Police (Traffic)which are clearly aimed at huge illegal earnings for the top police ranks in connivance with a Advertising company, to ensure a steady illegal income every month, year after year, to the traffic department, since the year 2001. The facts are as under:
A. On 24th May 2001, the Joint Police Commisioner of Police (traffic) Shri Prahlad Shinde, initiated a proposal, by addressing a letter to the Addl. Muncipal Commissioner, to install Umbrellas at traffic signals with revised design, stating “…for upgrading the quality of these umbrellas for better visibility of the policemen including at night and better facilities for storage of traffic control material and better aesthetics”.
B. In the garb of “Revised designed Umbrellas”, what has been installed across the city are Advertisement booths, inside which no policeman has ever stood to control traffic and since they are illuminated on 4 sides, in the night no policemen will be able to stand, because of the heat of the electrical lights. This is a clever way of having favoured a Advertising company to acquire space at the most visible locations in the city. For what consideration, no record is placed before the court.
C. During his short stint as Commissioner of Police Dr P S Pasricha, who is considered an expert in traffic control, discussed and finally wrote to Jt Commissioner of Police (Traffic) on 5th February 2004 about “urgent review of all the traffic booths and remove all those which seem to have been erected only for commercial purpose”. But unfortunately he was removed from that post that very day and Mr A N Roy was appointed as Police Commissioner. Was Dr P S Pasricha, removed from the post because he tried to stop, the Crores of Rupees, flowing in as bribes, is a question that deserves an answer. Letter attached as EXH “C“. The incoming Commissioner Mr A N Roy did nothing to stop these activities and the benefits to the advertising company only increased.
D. In affidavit filed on 7/3/2008 by Dy Commissioner of Police Shri Shahaji Solunke, in para 7 it is mentioned that “NOCs have been extended / renewed from time to time and they are valid till 30.4.2015”. By letter dated 9-5-2006 the MCGM Dy Chief Engineer Traffic has informed the Jt. Commissioner of Police (Traffic) “The validity of the permissions is upto 30-4-2010, which is as per the date of validity of No-objection specified vide your letter No 702/P/9/T/2003 of 22-4-2003”. How was NOC then extended till 2015 by both Police and Muncipal authorities, when it is still only 2008.
E. All these revised designed Umbrellas are supposed to be totally portable, according to the proposal sent on 24th May 2001. So it is clear that the electric company cannot provide electric meters. So how are they illuminated.
F. Electric power is pilfered, for these Umbrella’s with the blessings of the police. On footpaths, where power was not easily available from signals, meter is taken and bypassed. EXH “D “ is the picture of the meter at Marine drive.
G. The Electric Companies knowing that the final beneficiaries are the Sr. Police Officials has taken no efforts, to stop the pilferage, and treated it as a monthly gift to the Police.
H. The Muncipal authorities are aware of the breach of terms and conditions such as, building fixed structures instead of portable ones, taking power from existing signal equipments, removing Logo of police, for which 1/3rd area was reserved as per original conditions. Incidently this logo was removed, from hundreds of advertising booths overnight on 18th January 2008, after the police authorities, tapped conversations on my mobile on 16th and 17th January 2008.
PRAYERS
1. Having regard to the para No 1, the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai must be prosecuted, for unlawful actions of his officers and refusing to act, even after the leading newspaper Mumbai Mirror published the facts on the front page on 4-5-2007. The police station nearest to the Office of the commissioner of police shall be directed to prosecute the police Commissioner for dereliction of duty.
2. Not Following and complying court orders is no small thing and such acts by the any person, lower the Dignity of the High Court, when not punished. Having regard to para No 2,3,4,5 and 8 the honourable court shall punish the Commissioner Of Police and other Officials for Contempt of Court Orders and order them to file compliance report, without any further delay.
3. Having regard to para 9, Mr Arun Patnaik shall be directed to file an affidavit before this court and state the names of people who have sponsored that chowky.
4. Having regard to para 10 (F,G), the police shall be directed to take action against company officials of respondent no 4 and 6.
5. Having regard to para 10 (H), MCGM the respondent no 3, shall be directed to immediately remove all these so called advertisement Umbrellas.
6. Any other just and equitable order may kindly be passed.
The petitioner, has not filed any similar application in any other court.
Mumbai: /3/2008 Indur Kartar Chhugani
Petitioner
AFFIRMATION
I, Indur Kartar Chhugani Age 60 years, residing at Khar, do hereby state on solemn affirmation that what is stated hereinabove is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and record and information gathered by me, which I believe to be true.
Solemnly affirmed at Mumbai
This day 27th of March 2008(Indur Kartar Chhugani)
Indentified by :
