May 18, 2018 09:37 PM

Chandigarh (Subhash Jindal)

UT Chandigarh administration gets dressing down fromPunjab and Haryana Highcourt for on-serious approach on amendment of IPC provisions for offence of chain snatching.

Highcourt directs UT Chandigarh Police to produce evidence in support of allegations leveled against trial Courts about casual approach n granting bail to accused of snatchings:

Standing Counsel for UT Chandigarh administration alleged during today’s proceedings that Union of India is not taking any action on its request for making more stringent provisions in IPC for offence of snatching.

At this stage, Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor Generl of India, took an offence, and told the Highcourt  Bench, comprising ACJ Ajay Kumar Mittal and T.S. Dhindsa that UT administration has not so far provided the requisite information, which the Union Home Ministry had demanded from it vide its letter, vide which UT Administration was asked to supply (i) a copy of Haryana Government’s notification on amendment of IPC provisions; and (ii) draft notification on this issue which is to be approved by the Union of India. The HC Bench also did not appreciate the attitude of the UT Administration. The Bench observed that incidents of snatchings are again on the rise for the last few days. The Bench directed the UT Administration to provide necessary documents to Union of India before next date, so that steps may be taken by the Union of India to issue appropriate notification.

Petitioner, Advocate Hari Chand brought it to the notice of the HC that UT Police, in its affidavit filed on 10.5.2018, filed under signatures of DSP (Crime), Amrao Singh, had given certain suggestions, which are required to be looked into by the Bench. The suggestions include (i) Trial Courts should properly verify the persons who stand surety for the accused in chain snatching cases; (ii) Trial Courts should carefully consider grant of bail in case of habitual offenders in chain snatching cases. UT Standing Counsel supported the suggestions by observing that touts, who arranged surety for the accused persons, were always roaming around the trial Courts. The Bench then directed the UT Administration to produce evidence in support of the allegations leveled against trial Courts, so that appropriate directions may be issued to the trial Courts also. The PIL has been adjourned to 28th May, 2018 for further proceedings.

Have something to say? Post your comment
Copyright © 2017, Face 2 News, All rights reserved. Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy Disclaimers