The power of Right to Information (RTI) is not a secret anymore. The same tool will hold senior police officials of the Juhu police station answerable to the state chief information commissioner on Monday at 3pm.
The power of Right to Information (RTI) is not a secret anymore. The same tool will hold senior police officials of the Juhu police station answerable to the state chief information commissioner on Monday at 3pm. The SCIC is due to hear an appeal of dissatisfactory reply to an RTI application sent to the police station in June 2009 by complainant Yogacharya Shri Anandji.
Anandji had made his first appeal regarding the same to the DCP of Zone IX KMM Prasanna in April who on June 10 ordered “to provide the applicant with complete FIR details, with the case number within a week”. However, all Anandji received a week later was a copy of a few statements recorded concerning the case.
The dispute dates back to 1990 when Anandji lodged a complaint at Juhu police station regarding the attempt of unlawful eviction by the landlord of his yoga training centre in Juhu, which was inaugurated in 1978 by the then Prime Minister Morarji Desai. He also filed a private complaint with the Andheri court where he was surprised to see the report submitted by Juhu police station in June 2008 saying that the FIR in the matter had been registered and the accused was already acquitted in the matter by the same court.
While the hearing continued Anandji demanded the non-existing FIR copy and court’s order. But the police station said it did not have such an old record.
“I wondered why the police was being generous to my landlord and this curiosity led me to another expose of Vasundhara Society in Juhu, where police officers used a reserved plot owned by my landlord’s parent body (JVPD) for developing their society. A PIL regarding this has been filed in the Bombay high court,” said Anandji.
When contacted, senior inspector Deepak Katkade said, “There is no question of not furnishing details if they are available on record. However, if he is not satisfied with the reply he has all the right to make an appeal to the second appellate court and we shall follow the directions.”
However Anandji denied Katkade’s claim and said, “I got a letter from Katkade’s office regarding today’s hearing while he himself has gone on a 15-day leave since last week, clearly avoiding to be present during the hearing.”
){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}
){kind=small}