Month since launch, Delhi's ‘Shistachar Squads' detain over 6,500 for molestation, harassment
In March, after a law and order review meeting by Home Minister Amit Shah, Police Commissioner Sanjay Arora formed the dedicated anti-harassment teams — aka 'Shishtachar Squads' — in all 15 police districts to curb crime against women in the city.
According to the Special Police Unit for Women and Children, 1,055 drives were conducted between March 17 and April 24. These drives led to the detention of 6,584 people and the seizure of 275 vehicles.
All districts were asked to form two dedicated squads of 12 members each. Senior police officers have now asked to tell the team members to attend a one-day training programme to understand their duties.
Among the mandates for these squads were to enforce the law rather than impose personal or cultural morality on individuals, and ensure that the victims are protected from unnecessary public scrutiny or embarrassment, The Indian Express had reported.
In its manifesto for the Delhi Assembly elections, the BJP had promised 'Anti-Romeo squads' in public spaces to check sexual harassment. The Uttar Pradesh government was the first to form such squads after Yogi Adityanath became Chief Minister in 2017.
According to an officer, Delhi Police has been implementing multiple initiatives to curb crime against women, including sexual harassment and molestation, to foster a safer public environment and instill confidence amongst the vulnerable sections.
To augment their efforts, police have decided to formulate district-wise dedicated 'anti eve-teasing squads' in all districts of Delhi Police, the officer said. These squads will comprise trained personnel who shall focus on preventing, deterring, and responding to such offences on a real-time basis, he said.
The squads are supervised by an Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) from the district's Crime Against Women Cell. The primary focus area of the squads is hotspots and vulnerable areas that pose risks to women's safety.
Each squad will have one Inspector and one Sub-Inspector, apart from four female police personnel and five male police personnel (Assistant Sub-Inspectors, head constables and constables).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
19 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Govt to move Constitutional Amendment Bill to remove ministers detained on graft charges
Union Home Minister Amit Shah is expected to move in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, which seeks to remove a Central or State Minister who is facing allegations of corruption or serious offences and has been detained for at least 30 days. The Bill will amend Article 75 of the Constitution, which primarily deals with the appointment and responsibilities of the Council of Ministers, including the Prime Minister. 'A Minister, who for any period of 30 consecutive days during holding the office as such, is arrested and detained in custody, on allegation of committing an offence under any law for the time being in force, which is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or more, shall be removed from his office by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister to be tendered by the 31st day after being taken in such custody,' the Bill states. The move comes against the backdrop of the controversy that surrounded the arrest in 2023 of V Senthil Balaji, a minister in Tamil Nadu's DMK government. Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi had dismissed Balaji following his arrest in an alleged money laundering case. Chief Minister M K Stalin had then reinstated Balaji after the Supreme Court granted him bail. But after the apex court expressing concern over his return, Balaji was removed in a reshuffle. According to the statement of objects and reasons attached to the Bill, 'a minister who is facing allegations of serious criminal offences, arrested and detained in custody, may thwart or hinder the canons of constitutional morality and principles of good governance and eventually diminish the constitutional trust reposed by people in him.' It also says that 'elected representatives represent hopes and aspirations of the people of India. It is expected that they rise above political interests and act only in the public interest and for the welfare of the people… It is expected that the character and conduct of Ministers holding the office should be beyond any ray of suspicion'. Article 164 (1) of the Constitution states the Chief Minister shall be appointed by the Governor, and that other Ministers shall be appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister and shall hold office at the pleasure of the Governor. However, several court rulings have interpreted that the power of the Governor primarily flows from the 'aid and advice' of the Council of Ministers. Reacting to the proposed Bill, Congress MP Abhishek Singhvi posted on X that the 'new proposed law removes incumbent CM, etc, immediately on arrest'. 'Best way to destabilise opposition is to unleash biased central agencies to arrest oppo(sition) CMs and despite being unable to defeat them electorally, remove them by arbitrary arrests. And no ruling party incumbent CM ever touched,' he posted. On Tuesday, Shah wrote to Lok Sabha Secretariat, informing Secretary General Utpal Kumar Singh that the Union Home Ministry also intends to move an amendment to the Union Territory Administration Bill in the ongoing Monsoon session. According to sources, the revised list of Government business for Wednesday will include the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025; The Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025; The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill 2025; and, Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, 2025. Almost all of these Bills, except the one related to online gaming, are likely to go to a Joint Committee of both the Houses for further scrutiny and discussion after their introduction in the Lok Sabha. While the Constitutional Amendment Bill applies to all states, Union Territories are governed through a separate legislative framework. For J&K, the Government moved an amendment to the J&K Reorganisation Act and for the other UTs, the amendment is being made to the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963. UTs have a distinct constitutional and administrative status compared to states, and are directly governed by the Central Government, typically through an appointed Lieutenant Governor or Administrator. Therefore, if an amendment affects both states and UTs, separate but related legislation is introduced to cover UT-specific provisions and to bring their laws in conformity with the amended Constitution. In his letter to the Lok Sabha Secretary, Shah also sought leniency in the rules of the House for moving the Bills without the required notice. According to Rule 19A of the Lok Sabha's Rules of Procedure, the minister should give prior notice before introducing a Bill in the Lok Sabha. Additionally, Rule 19B, which is related to 19A, states that Government Bills should be circulated to all members of the Lok Sabha before they are formally introduced to allow members time to review them and prepare for discussion. The Government wanted leniency in these key rules as there was not enough time with the Monsoon session ending on August 21, sources said.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
19 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Govt to table bills for removal of PM, CM, minister held on serious charges
Union Home Minister Amit Shah will also move a motion in the Lok Sabha to refer these three bills to a joint committee of Parliament Press Trust of India New Delhi The government is planning to introduce three bills in Parliament on Wednesday for the removal of a prime minister, a Union minister, a chief minister or a minister of a state or Union Territory when arrested or detained on serious criminal charges for 30 days in a row. If any one of them is arrested and detained in custody for consecutive 30 days for offences that attract a jail term of at least five years, they will lose their job on the 31st day. These bills are the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill 2025; the Constitution (One Hundred And Thirtieth Amendment) Bill 2025; and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill 2025. Union Home Minister Amit Shah will also move a motion in the Lok Sabha to refer these three bills to a joint committee of Parliament. Interestingly, former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji had not resigned from their posts ever after their arrests on different charges. "A minister, who for any period of 30 consecutive days during holding the office as such, is arrested and detained in custody, on allegation of committing an offence under any law for the time being in force, which is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or more, shall be removed from his office by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister to be tendered by the thirty-first day, after being taken in such custody," one of the bill says. It also said: "Provided that if the advice of the prime minister, for the removal of such minister is not tendered to the President by the thirty-first day, he shall cease to be a minister, with effect from the day falling thereafter". "Provided further that in case of the prime minister, who for any period of 30 consecutive days during holding the office as such, is arrested and detained in custody, on allegation of committing an offence under any law for the time being in force, which is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or more, shall tender his resignation by the thirty-first day after such arrest and detention, and if he does not tender his resignation, he shall cease to be the Prime Minister with effect from the day falling thereafter," it added. According to the statement of objects and reasons of the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill 2025, there is no provision under the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 (20 of 1963) for the removal of the chief minister or a minister arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges. Hence, there is a need to amend section 45 of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963, to provide a legal framework for the removal of a chief minister or a minister in such cases. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objectives. The objectives of the Constitution (One Hundred And Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, say there is no provision under the Constitution for the removal of a minister who is arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges. Hence, there is a need to amend Articles 75, 164 and 239AA of the Constitution, for providing a legal framework for the removal of the prime minister or a minister in the Union Council of Ministers and the chief minister or a minister in the Council of Ministers of States and the National Capital Territory of Delhi in such cases. This bill seeks to achieve the above objectives. The objectives of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025, say there is no provision under the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 (34 of 2019) for the removal of the chief minister or a minister arrested and detained in custody on account of serious criminal charges. Hence, there is a need to amend section 54 of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, to provide a legal framework for the removal of the Chief Minister or a Minister in such cases. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objectives. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
19 minutes ago
- Business Standard
US to screen immigrants for 'anti-Americanism' in process to get green card
Immigrants seeking a legal pathway to live and work in the United States will now be subject to screening for anti-Americanism', authorities said Tuesday, raising concerns among critics that it gives officers too much leeway in rejecting foreigners based on a subjective judgment. US Citizenship and Immigration Services said officers will now consider whether an applicant for benefits, such as a green card, endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused" anti-American, terrorist or antisemitic views. America's benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies, Matthew Tragesser, USCIS spokesman, said in a statement. Immigration benefits including to live and work in the United States remain a privilege, not a right. It isn't specified what constitutes anti-Americanism and it isn't clear how and when the directive would be applied. The message is that the US and immigration agencies are going to be less tolerant of anti-Americanism or antisemitism when making immigration decisions," Elizabeth Jacobs, director of regulatory affairs and policy at the Centre for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates for immigration restrictions, said on Tuesday. Jacobs said the government is being more explicit in the kind of behaviours and practices officers should consider, but emphasised that discretion is still in place. "The agency cannot tell officers that they have to deny just to consider it as a negative discretion, she said. Critics worry the policy update will allow for more subjective views of what is considered anti-American and allow an officer's personal bias to cloud his or her judgment. For me, the really big story is they are opening the door for stereotypes and prejudice and implicit bias to take the wheel in these decisions. That's really worrisome," said Jane Lilly Lopez, associate professor of sociology at Brigham Young University. The policy changes follow others recently implemented since the start of the Trump administration including social media vetting and the most recent addition of assessing applicants seeking naturalisation for 'good moral character'. That will not only consider not simply the absence of misconduct but also factor the applicant's positive attributes and contributions. It means you are going to just do a whole lot more work to provide evidence that you meet our standards, Lopez said. Experts disagree on the constitutionality of the policy involving people who are not US citizens and their freedom of speech. Jacobs, of the Centre for Immigration Studies, said First Amendment rights do not extend to people outside the US or who are not US citizens. Ruby Robinson, senior managing attorney with the Michigan Immigrant Rights Centre, believes the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution protects all people in the United States, regardless of their immigration status, against government encroachment. A lot of this administration's activities infringe on constitutional rights and do need to be resolved, ultimately, in courts, Robinson added. Attorneys are advising clients to adjust their expectations. People need to understand that we have a different system today and a lot more things that apply to US citizens are not going to apply to somebody who's trying to enter the United States," said Jaime Diez, an immigration attorney based in Brownsville, Texas. Jonathan Grode, managing partner of Green and Spiegel immigration law firm, said the policy update was not unexpected considering how the Trump administration approaches immigration. This is what was elected. They're allowed to interpret the rules the way they want, Grode said. The policy always to them is to shrink the strike zone. The law is still the same. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
