Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
karira

Police still reluctant to lodge FIRs

Recommended Posts

karira

As reported by TNN on timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 26 July 2008:

Police still reluctant to lodge FIRs-Lucknow-Cities-The Times of India

 

Police still reluctant to lodge FIRs

 

LUCKNOW: At least 800 complainants in the city took legal recourse to get first information reports (FIRs) registered in 2006 and 2007. Besides, the police registered FIRs in 17% of complaints in 2006 and 4.5% in 2007. The facts and figures have been released by the office of SSP Lucknow to an applicant under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

 

The figures are bleak not only against the backdrop of CrPC provision that calls for registration of FIR in all the complaints received at police stations but also against the government's assurances made in similar vein.

 

At least 75 to 80 complaints are received at each police station in the district every day.

 

In 2006, 258 aggrieved people knocked the of judiciary to get the police register an FIR on their complaint and in 2007, this number doubled up to 578.

 

The office has also revealed the astounding number of complaints received by it regarding matters in which no FIRs were registered. In 2006, the number of such complaints was 30,356 and in 2007, it was 26,303.

 

However, when the police took cognizance of these complaints, registered FIRs and investigated the matter, gross apathy and neglect on the part of police came to fore in 2,885 cases in 2006 and 761 cases in 2007.

 

The complaints were received from 37 police stations of Lucknow district.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sumi

this does not give any solution to my problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tsbraha

Hello Sumi,

 

I think if you find police is not filing your complaint, than one possible way is send your complaint by registered post to the SHO of that particular Police Station. You will receive the receipt of that registered post. Do mention in that complaint besides your no. of visits to police station, police refused to lodge FIR, therefor you are sending this complaint via post.

Ask police to register FIR for the mentioned case.

 

Wait for some days to see what action police takes. Finally if you think police has not taken any action, file an application under RTI to seek information from Police

"WHY POLICE HAS NOT REGISTERED THE FIR"

Attach all previous documents with that RTI appeal.

 

I hope this works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cleancorruption

I doubt that works as the police will still dodge it. While this approach is justified, a complaint u/s sec 156(3) CrPC should be tried in the MM court to direct the police to register a case

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slchowdhary

Before going to MM Court, one attempt should be made to write to the Supdt. Police requesting him to direct the SHO to register it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pendyala1

Could anyone tell me to whom the fees(Rs,10/-) should be payable to get action taken report on an fir funder RTI act , from office of circle inspector of police.I understand that circle inspector is designated as PIO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deepuiitk

Put the following statement in your application and attached a blank IPO.

"I enclose herewith crossed blank Indian postal order No.____________ for Rs.10/-. Please fill-in name of payee, since I could not locate correct name of payee. Please refer section 5 [3] of RTI Act 2005. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • Shree Vathsan
      By Shree Vathsan
      I have been falsely implicated in a case by police for removing illegal banners. They  have remanded me under Sec506(II) Attempt to murder on complaint from ruling party men. Though the FIR is available online I want copy of  other documents like complaint letter, confession letter in which they have forcibly made me sign. I also want the CCTV footage of the police station at that particular date and time. 
      I have already filed RTI in this regard and have had the information denied under Article 8 1 (h) saying the case is  under investigation. Is this correct? Will First appeal be of any help?
    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      RTI exposes 481 transfer requests by mumbai police officials written by MLAs and ministers in just 19 months.
       
      the Mumbai police commissioner and the Maharashtra director-general of police have received a record 481 written recommendations for transfers from MLAs and ministers in just 19 months.
       
      From March to September this year, the DGP got 99 recommendations for transfers, of which 30 have come from the chief minister himself. Some of the recommendations have also come from Deputy CM R R Patil.
       
      This was exposed following queries filed under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
       
      ecommendations for transfers had in fact come down in 2004, after the joint commissioner of police (administration) issued a strict warning to 71 police officers and 64 constables for trying to use political clout.
       
      Also, two departmental circulars were issued stating that any violation of the rule 413 rule of the Police Manual would be strictly dealt with.
       
      Rule 413 states that "government servants are forbidden to approach officials of other departments or non-official people for support and redress. They are liable for disciplinary action if MLAs or non-official persons approach the government on their behalf," the rule says.
       
       
       
      [sourse TOI]
       
       

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy