Latest news with #PoliceAct
The Print
24-05-2025
- The Print
Colonel assault case: HC rejects Punjab Police inspector's anticipatory bail
Bath had then alleged that the assailants — four inspector-rank officers of Punjab Police and their armed subordinates — attacked him and his son without provocation, snatched his ID card and mobile phone, and threatened him with a 'fake encounter' — all in public view and under CCTV camera coverage. The colonel suffered a broken arm, while his son had a cut on his head in the incident. Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath had accused 12 Punjab Police personnel of assaulting him and his son over a parking dispute in Patiala outside a dhaba in March. Chandigarh, May 23 (PTI) The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Punjab Police inspector Ronnie Singh Salh in connection with the assault case of Army Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath in Patiala more than two months ago. 'This vile, uncivilised, pitiless and brutal way is not the manner in which a police force ought to behave with its people, anywhere, and especially, in a democratic country like ours,' Justice Anoop Chitkara observed in his order. This horrific, 'gut-wrenching incident' showcases the complete misuse of police power by these officers, he said. '…Even if it is hypothetically assumed that the victims had wrongfully parked their car on the roadside, still the job of a law enforcement officer is to issue a challan (ticket) to that motor vehicle which has violated any such law. 'It is not the job of any trained law enforcer, skilled in the efficient use of force continuum to mete out unmerciful, furious beatings to a common man on the drop of the hat and disrespect civilians, wielding their authority to disregard and disrupt law and order themselves,' Justice Chitkara observed. It appears that this was an unfortunate case of gross misuse of emergency powers under the Police Act, the order reads. The judge said in his order that the prime duty of the police is not to instil fear in the minds of public using unwarranted force but to secure observance of law and order and to bring that goal to fruition, a prerequisite is adherence to and respect for legal framework itself. 'It is common knowledge that the majority of the people, especially the poor, downtrodden, and illiterate, have been deeply conditioned to be afraid of the police, harbouring a fear of them in the hearts of hearts. It is behaviour like that as seen in the present case, exhibited by a thin minority of officials, which inspires such fear and terror and is exemplary of incidents fuelling such narratives,' he observed. On the contrary, the purpose of the police force is to impartially, without fear or favour, and without biases, take care of its people, with sensitivity, affection, empathy and kindness on the one hand; while being firm, honest and astute on the other, using reasonable force when it is inevitable to control hooliganism, he said. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had in April directed Chandigarh Police to probe the case and also issued directions to complete the investigation within four months. Colonel Bath had sought transfer of the probe to the CBI or another independent agency. Punjab Police lodged a fresh FIR based on Colonel Bath's statement a week after the alleged incident. Justice Chitkara, in the order on Friday, observed that the complainant's case is that, despite informing the police officers of his identity as a colonel in the Indian Army and showing his identity card, the police officers did not stop with their thrashing, which further highlights the high headedness, cruelty, arrogance and lack of any empathy of the police team. 'Such conduct of the police team in brutally beating an individual, even after being made aware that he was a serving member of the armed forces reflects the mindset of some of the police officers in this part of the country. 'We must not forget so early that this region is closer to a hostile border, has a history of militancy, and is still battling cross-border narco terrorism,' he observed. The court also called for a thorough investigation by a senior-level officer not less than the rank of an SP into the delay in registration of an FIR on the victim's complaint. '…If the police officers display such brutality, high handedness and disrespect towards the members who belong to our esteemed defense services, such a reprehensible conduct would certainly be against the whole nation and may even imply that such officers would be happy to serve any ruler, which defies the entire purpose for which a democracy would give them so much power in the first place'. There is no doubt that the petitioner and his accomplices were the aggressors who started assaulting the complainant and his son on a parking issue, simply because the manner in which they demanded complainant party's car to be moved was objected to by the latter, the order says. 'A perusal of the bail petition and the documents attached prima facie points towards the petitioner's involvement and does not make out a case for anticipatory bail. The impact of crime would also not justify anticipatory bail…', the judge observed, rejecting the anticipatory bail plea. PTI SUN MNK MNK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
NDTV
23-05-2025
- NDTV
Colonel Assault Case: Punjab Police Inspector's Anticipatory Bail Rejected
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Punjab Police inspector Ronnie Singh Salh in connection with the assault case of Army Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath in Patiala more than two months ago. Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath had accused 12 Punjab Police personnel of assaulting him and his son over a parking dispute in Patiala outside a dhaba in March. Bath had then alleged that the assailants -- four inspector-rank officers of Punjab Police and their armed subordinates -- attacked him and his son without provocation, snatched his ID card and mobile phone, and threatened him with a "fake encounter" -- all in public view and under CCTV camera coverage. The colonel suffered a broken arm, while his son had a cut on his head in the incident. "This vile, uncivilised, pitiless and brutal way is not the manner in which a police force ought to behave with its people, anywhere, and especially, in a democratic country like ours," Justice Anoop Chitkara observed in his order. This horrific, "gut-wrenching incident" showcases the complete misuse of police power by these officers, he said. "...Even if it is hypothetically assumed that the victims had wrongfully parked their car on the roadside, still the job of a law enforcement officer is to issue a challan (ticket) to that motor vehicle which has violated any such law. "It is not the job of any trained law enforcer, skilled in the efficient use of force continuum to mete out unmerciful, furious beatings to a common man on the drop of the hat and disrespect civilians, wielding their authority to disregard and disrupt law and order themselves," Justice Chitkara observed. It appears that this was an unfortunate case of gross misuse of emergency powers under the Police Act, the order reads. The judge said in his order that the prime duty of the police is not to instil fear in the minds of public using unwarranted force but to secure observance of law and order and to bring that goal to fruition, a prerequisite is adherence to and respect for legal framework itself. "It is common knowledge that the majority of the people, especially the poor, downtrodden, and illiterate, have been deeply conditioned to be afraid of the police, harbouring a fear of them in the hearts of hearts. It is behaviour like that as seen in the present case, exhibited by a thin minority of officials, which inspires such fear and terror and is exemplary of incidents fuelling such narratives," he observed. On the contrary, the purpose of the police force is to impartially, without fear or favour, and without biases, take care of its people, with sensitivity, affection, empathy and kindness on the one hand; while being firm, honest and astute on the other, using reasonable force when it is inevitable to control hooliganism, he said. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had in April directed Chandigarh Police to probe the case and also issued directions to complete the investigation within four months. Colonel Bath had sought transfer of the probe to the CBI or another independent agency. Punjab Police lodged a fresh FIR based on Colonel Bath's statement a week after the alleged incident. Justice Chitkara, in the order on Friday, observed that the complainant's case is that, despite informing the police officers of his identity as a colonel in the Indian Army and showing his identity card, the police officers did not stop with their thrashing, which further highlights the high headedness, cruelty, arrogance and lack of any empathy of the police team. "Such conduct of the police team in brutally beating an individual, even after being made aware that he was a serving member of the armed forces reflects the mindset of some of the police officers in this part of the country. "We must not forget so early that this region is closer to a hostile border, has a history of militancy, and is still battling cross-border narco terrorism," he observed. The court also called for a thorough investigation by a senior-level officer not less than the rank of an SP into the delay in registration of an FIR on the victim's complaint. "...If the police officers display such brutality, high handedness and disrespect towards the members who belong to our esteemed defense services, such a reprehensible conduct would certainly be against the whole nation and may even imply that such officers would be happy to serve any ruler, which defies the entire purpose for which a democracy would give them so much power in the first place". There is no doubt that the petitioner and his accomplices were the aggressors who started assaulting the complainant and his son on a parking issue, simply because the manner in which they demanded complainant party's car to be moved was objected to by the latter, the order says. "A perusal of the bail petition and the documents attached prima facie points towards the petitioner's involvement and does not make out a case for anticipatory bail. The impact of crime would also not justify anticipatory bail...", the judge observed, rejecting the anticipatory bail plea
Hindustan Times
23-05-2025
- Hindustan Times
Colonel assault case: HC rejects Punjab Police inspector's anticipatory bail
Chandigarh, The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Punjab Police inspector Ronnie Singh Salh in connection with the assault case of Army Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath in Patiala more than two months ago. Colonel Pushpinder Singh Bath had accused 12 Punjab Police personnel of assaulting him and his son over a parking dispute in Patiala outside a dhaba in March. Bath had then alleged that the assailants four inspector-rank officers of Punjab Police and their armed subordinates attacked him and his son without provocation, snatched his ID card and mobile phone, and threatened him with a "fake encounter" all in public view and under CCTV camera coverage. The colonel suffered a broken arm, while his son had a cut on his head in the incident. "This vile, uncivilised, pitiless and brutal way is not the manner in which a police force ought to behave with its people, anywhere, and especially, in a democratic country like ours," Justice Anoop Chitkara observed in his order. This horrific, "gut-wrenching incident" showcases the complete misuse of police power by these officers, he said. "...Even if it is hypothetically assumed that the victims had wrongfully parked their car on the roadside, still the job of a law enforcement officer is to issue a challan to that motor vehicle which has violated any such law. "It is not the job of any trained law enforcer, skilled in the efficient use of force continuum to mete out unmerciful, furious beatings to a common man on the drop of the hat and disrespect civilians, wielding their authority to disregard and disrupt law and order themselves," Justice Chitkara observed. It appears that this was an unfortunate case of gross misuse of emergency powers under the Police Act, the order reads. The judge said in his order that the prime duty of the police is not to instil fear in the minds of public using unwarranted force but to secure observance of law and order and to bring that goal to fruition, a prerequisite is adherence to and respect for legal framework itself. "It is common knowledge that the majority of the people, especially the poor, downtrodden, and illiterate, have been deeply conditioned to be afraid of the police, harbouring a fear of them in the hearts of hearts. It is behaviour like that as seen in the present case, exhibited by a thin minority of officials, which inspires such fear and terror and is exemplary of incidents fuelling such narratives," he observed. On the contrary, the purpose of the police force is to impartially, without fear or favour, and without biases, take care of its people, with sensitivity, affection, empathy and kindness on the one hand; while being firm, honest and astute on the other, using reasonable force when it is inevitable to control hooliganism, he said. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had in April directed Chandigarh Police to probe the case and also issued directions to complete the investigation within four months. Colonel Bath had sought transfer of the probe to the CBI or another independent agency. Punjab Police lodged a fresh FIR based on Colonel Bath's statement a week after the alleged incident. Justice Chitkara, in the order on Friday, observed that the complainant's case is that, despite informing the police officers of his identity as a colonel in the Indian Army and showing his identity card, the police officers did not stop with their thrashing, which further highlights the high headedness, cruelty, arrogance and lack of any empathy of the police team. "Such conduct of the police team in brutally beating an individual, even after being made aware that he was a serving member of the armed forces reflects the mindset of some of the police officers in this part of the country. "We must not forget so early that this region is closer to a hostile border, has a history of militancy, and is still battling cross-border narco terrorism," he observed. The court also called for a thorough investigation by a senior-level officer not less than the rank of an SP into the delay in registration of an FIR on the victim's complaint. "...If the police officers display such brutality, high handedness and disrespect towards the members who belong to our esteemed defense services, such a reprehensible conduct would certainly be against the whole nation and may even imply that such officers would be happy to serve any ruler, which defies the entire purpose for which a democracy would give them so much power in the first place". There is no doubt that the petitioner and his accomplices were the aggressors who started assaulting the complainant and his son on a parking issue, simply because the manner in which they demanded complainant party's car to be moved was objected to by the latter, the order says. "A perusal of the bail petition and the documents attached prima facie points towards the petitioner's involvement and does not make out a case for anticipatory bail. The impact of crime would also not justify anticipatory bail...", the judge observed, rejecting the anticipatory bail plea.
Vancouver Sun
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Vancouver Sun
B.C. minister's performance in key portfolio leaves much to be desired
VICTORIA — Public Safety Minister Garry Begg expressed no concern this week when news broke that the RCMP had interviewed Conservative MLA Elenore Sturko as part of a witch hunt for a whistleblower. Begg hadn't actually launched the investigation into the leak to Sturko that exposed the widespread diversion of safer supply drugs to the illicit market. The order was given by Glen Lewis, director of police services in Begg's ministry of public safety and solicitor general. But the investigation had no more enthusiastic defender than the minister himself. A daily roundup of Opinion pieces from the Sun and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Informed Opinion will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. 'The director is fully within his role to act as he did,' Begg told reporters Wednesday. 'It was an appropriate request, an appropriate investigation. The director did exactly what he should have done.' It wasn't really a request. The section of the Police Act under which Lewis acted made it an order to the RCMP, not a request. Nor did Begg see anything wrong with police descending on Sturko to ask for the source of the leak. 'She was told right away that she was not the subject of an investigation,' the minister said. What about her concern that the investigation was intended to silence whistleblowers and intimidate the Opposition? 'She was, like I, a policeman for many years,' replied Begg. 'She knows how police do their business. I would be very surprised if she was shocked that the police wanted to talk to her.' So, this was OK in his view? 'I certainly approve of an investigation being conducted into the information that was provided to her — that's appropriate.' Begg said all this after the Premier David Eby had said the opposite. Eby defended Sturko. He agreed that the probe could intimidate whistleblowers and the Opposition. Also suggested police resources could be better applied to investigate pharmacies engaged in the diversion of safer supply drugs. Were the premier and his minister of public safety on the same page? 'I can't comment on what the premier has said,' Begg replied. 'I haven't talked to the premier about it.' There matters stood at mid-afternoon on Wednesday, following question period in the legislature. Then at 5 p.m. came an email with what were advertised as 'clarifying comments' from the minister. 'I've now had the opportunity to speak to the premier,' Begg began. 'We've discussed the issue, and I'd like my position to be clear.' One: 'What I approve of is an independent process, and the director of police services was operating under his authority.' Two: 'We support whistleblowers and whistleblower protections.' Three: 'It is our view that everyone should be focusing attention on investigating the pharmacies alleged to be involved in drug diversion.' Four: 'I fully agree Elenore Sturko was doing her job.' Begg said almost none of that to reporters a few hours earlier. Not that whistleblowers needed protection, not that there were better uses for police resources, not that Sturko was doing her job. Presumably his comments flowed from his session with the premier. Eby had offered a critical take on the leak investigation at a noon-hour news conference. He had repeated his comments in question period. On Sturko: 'It is important that the House recognizes that she was doing her job. I spent some time on the Opposition benches, I recognize effective Opposition work. This was certainly a case of that. She shouldn't get a phone call from police for doing her job.' On whistleblowers: 'We introduced legislation to protect whistleblowers. We support whistleblowers bringing forward information that can assist us all in understanding what's happening in the province on the front lines.' On the investigation: 'I'm extremely reluctant to weigh in on where police put their resources. But I really hope that there is more effort going into investigating these pharmacies rather than anything related to the member and what she did in this House.' On Lewis himself: 'I haven't talked to the director yet. The independent director has an important role to play in our system. That independence is part of it. The head of the public service will contact him and will understand the intention and what the plan was and so on.' The premier said all of that — and more — in question period. Begg was in the House when Eby said it. His desk is a few seats away from that of the premier. Yet when reporters talked to the minister after question period, he appeared not to have absorbed any of the premier's thinking. Was Begg not paying attention? Or is he just one of those NDP ministers, confined to a message box and unable to venture outside until authorized to say something different. Either way it wasn't a flattering performance by a minister in a key portfolio. No wonder Begg didn't make the cut when Eby appointed his first cabinet. It took his 22-vote victory in the last election, which secured the NDP majority, before he made it to cabinet rank. No wonder, too, that the premier decided to bypass the minister and get the head of the public service to communicate directly with Lewis on the rationale for this ill-advised investigation. vpalmer@
Vancouver Sun
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Vancouver Sun
Minister's performance in key portfolio leaves much to be desired
VICTORIA — Public Safety Minister Garry Begg expressed no concern this week when news broke that the RCMP had interviewed Conservative MLA Elenore Sturko as part of a witch hunt for a whistleblower. Begg hadn't actually launched the investigation into the leak to Sturko that exposed the widespread diversion of safer supply drugs to the illicit market. The order was given by Glen Lewis, director of police services in Begg's ministry of public safety and solicitor general. But the investigation had no more enthusiastic defender than the minister himself. A daily roundup of Opinion pieces from the Sun and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Informed Opinion will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. 'The director is fully within his role to act as he did,' Begg told reporters Wednesday. 'It was an appropriate request, an appropriate investigation. The director did exactly what he should have done.' It wasn't really a request. The section of the Police Act under which Lewis acted made it an order to the RCMP, not a request. Nor did Begg see anything wrong with police descending on Sturko to ask for the source of the leak. 'She was told right away that she was not the subject of an investigation,' the minister said. What about her concern that the investigation was intended to silence whistleblowers and intimidate the Opposition? 'She was, like I, a policeman for many years,' replied Begg. 'She knows how police do their business. I would be very surprised if she was shocked that the police wanted to talk to her.' So, this was OK in his view? 'I certainly approve of an investigation being conducted into the information that was provided to her — that's appropriate.' Begg said all this after the Premier David Eby had said the opposite. Eby defended Sturko. He agreed that the probe could intimidate whistleblowers and the Opposition. Also suggested police resources could be better applied to investigate pharmacies engaged in the diversion of safer supply drugs. Were the premier and his minister of public safety on the same page? 'I can't comment on what the premier has said,' Begg replied. 'I haven't talked to the premier about it.' There matters stood at mid-afternoon on Wednesday, following question period in the legislature. Then at 5 p.m. came an email with what were advertised as 'clarifying comments' from the minister. 'I've now had the opportunity to speak to the premier,' Begg began. 'We've discussed the issue, and I'd like my position to be clear.' One: 'What I approve of is an independent process, and the director of police services was operating under his authority.' Two: 'We support whistleblowers and whistleblower protections.' Three: 'It is our view that everyone should be focusing attention on investigating the pharmacies alleged to be involved in drug diversion.' Four: 'I fully agree Elenore Sturko was doing her job.' Begg said almost none of that to reporters a few hours earlier. Not that whistleblowers needed protection, not that there were better uses for police resources, not that Sturko was doing her job. Presumably his comments flowed from his session with the premier. Eby had offered a critical take on the leak investigation at a noon-hour news conference. He had repeated his comments in question period. On Sturko: 'It is important that the House recognizes that she was doing her job. I spent some time on the Opposition benches, I recognize effective Opposition work. This was certainly a case of that. She shouldn't get a phone call from police for doing her job.' On whistleblowers: 'We introduced legislation to protect whistleblowers. We support whistleblowers bringing forward information that can assist us all in understanding what's happening in the province on the front lines.' On the investigation: 'I'm extremely reluctant to weigh in on where police put their resources. But I really hope that there is more effort going into investigating these pharmacies rather than anything related to the member and what she did in this House.' On Lewis himself: 'I haven't talked to the director yet. The independent director has an important role to play in our system. That independence is part of it. The head of the public service will contact him and will understand the intention and what the plan was and so on.' The premier said all of that — and more — in question period. Begg was in the House when Eby said it. His desk is a few seats away from that of the premier. Yet when reporters talked to the minister after question period, he appeared not to have absorbed any of the premier's thinking. Was Begg not paying attention? Or is he just one of those NDP ministers, confined to a message box and unable to venture outside until authorized to say something different. Either way it wasn't a flattering performance by a minister in a key portfolio. No wonder Begg didn't make the cut when Eby appointed his first cabinet. It took his 22-vote victory in the last election, which secured the NDP majority, before he made it to cabinet rank. No wonder, too, that the premier decided to bypass the minister and get the head of the public service to communicate directly with Lewis on the rationale for this ill-advised investigation. vpalmer@
