“Three high-ranking officers died because they were not provided with good weapons during the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack and post that you (state) still have not changed the weapons provided to the policemen,” observed the Bombay High Court on Tuesday as it directed the state to revise the weapons policy at once.
A division bench of Justice V M Kanade and Justice Anuja Prabhudessai instructed the government to constitute a special committee, to be headed by the Director General of Police, to facilitate the policy revision, especially for personnel attached to the Anti-Terrorism Squad. The bench said it was unfortunate that the policy had remained unchanged since 2010 despite Maharashtra witnessing several blasts in past four years.
Public Prosecutor Sandeep Shinde submitted to the court different government resolutions passed with regard to the weapons for the police. He added that as per the policy itself, there has to be a revision every three years.
The court was acting on a public interest litigation filed by Pune resident Ashwini Rane, who has questioned the skills of various probe agencies, including the CBI. Her husband, Nikhil, was murdered by some assailants on November 23, 2009, but none of the agencies investigating the case – the local police, Pune crime branch; state CID and CBI – could nab the killers.
The court also directed the government to revise allowances and incentives for the policemen. Counsel Anil Anturkar argued that as per the policy nearly Rs 250 is given as DA a month, which comes to Rs 8 per day. With this money, a cop won’t even be able to eat a vada pav, he said.
The bench agreed with the argument and said “In several matters we pass strictures against the policemen for not performing their duties, if the state is not taking care of the policemen then we cannot expect anything from them. At least basic facilities need to be provided.”
The court further said that training and refresher courses in firing should be given to officers across ranks and more than once every year. It said, “The perception of the general public is very much that the police cannot combat terrorism, if you (state) don’t provide him with modern weapons, how can it be expected from him to fight terrorism.”
The HC will hear the petition after two weeks. Meanwhile, the state has been asked to file a compliance report on the steps taken to form the committee and revise weapons policy.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}