A cop all over, cooks up evidence

Bengaluru, Nov. 20: When a city police inspector claims that he was in two different places at a given time on the same day, something seems to have gone terribly wrong.

The officer is A. Manjunath, currently serving as police inspector with city special branch. He was inspector at Yeshwanthpur police station when the incident happened in 2007.

According to the station diary, Manjunath was at the station and with an accused, writing a panchnama at the same time. On another day, he claims he was busy recording the statement of five witnesses, while his official papers say he was on leave, sanctioned by none other than his DGP!

The police also seems to have duped the court by submitting a dead man’s witness statement, which made the court even issue summons asking the deceased to be present for the hearing.

Mr R. Kumar (name changed) was accused of dowry harassment by his wife who visited the station on July 26, 2007. “She filed a complaint at 1.45 pm. Inspector Manjunath claims he visited my residence between 2 pm and four pm on the same day for panchanama. But his station diary shows he was present in the station till 4 pm”, claimed Kumar.

Who will save men who are burnt?

As I read this article, wherein Supreme Court judge is calling for hanging of people who burn brides, a hailstorm of thoughts crosses my mind. Being the Public Relations Officer of Save Indian Family Foundation, an NGO dedicated to promote the cause of Gender Equality and Family Harmony; I come across cases of men wronged by their wives on a daily basis wherein men are simply penalized for the mere fact that they are MEN.

One mere complaint of harassment from their wives, whether true or not, lands them in jail along with all their family members named in the complaint without any trial or investigation. Many lose their self-esteem, jobs even; commit suicide as evident from the suicide statistics available with the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). As per the statistics, 57593 married men committed suicide in 2007 vis-à-vis 30064 married women. Figures for 2006 were 55452 married men vs. 29869 married women while those for 2005 are 52483 married men vs. 28188 married women. Every year more and more married men are committing suicide. But still there is no protection given to men. A major contribution of this comes from the misuse of dowry laws against men wherein a social presumption works against them

Now coming back to the article I’ve referred, Markenday Katju, Justice, Supreme Court of India today made a statement that “Those who burn brides should be hanged.” But, who is going to prove that the bride was burned? Will a man be hanged if his adulterous wife puts kerosene on herself and dies of burning? Or if the parents of the girl kill their daughter and then put the blame on the husband, then will the husband be hung?

And when you make a gender biased statement, “Those who burn brides need to be hanged”, why is it that you are not ready to offer the same level of protection to married men who are burnt alive? What is their fault? According to the NCRB data 3400 married are burnt alive every year on an average.

Further, Justice Katju went on to say that, “They all say that. Every time they burn a bride, they say it was a suicide.” Now this is nothing short of imposing his own assumptions on to the society, a right which he does not have, not even as a Supreme Court judge. First of all, he has assumed that all married women who die of burning are killed by their in-laws. There is no basis for his assumption as death due to burning can happen due to any reason, even kitchen accidents, negligence by women, suicide etc. And it will definitely not be in the interest of justice to hang the husband for these cases but from what views have transpired out of Katju’s statement, it is clearly evident that he has taken a gender obsessed stand which is not acceptable from a Supreme Court Judge.

Justice Katju’s statements are a clear call for the need of Judicial Reforms. Also in addition, before hanging husbands for ‘allegedly’ burning brides, Justice Katju needs to remember that the police force does not conduct a fair inquiry into the incident and merely relies on statements and is thoroughly incompetent in collecting evidences. With such lousy investigation and presumptions working at the back of mind, justice cannot be expected out of courts and in such a situation; “Judicial Reforms” is the call of the day.

With M Veerappa Moily becoming the law minister and talking of “Judicial Reforms” as the first thing to be done, some hope is definitely restored because Judicial Reforms are utmost necessary in today’s times of deteriorating faith on the judiciary. With irresponsible statements coming from the judiciary, it is clearly evident that the intellectual level of the judiciary has severely degraded. SIFF calls upon all the citizens to take part in judicial reforms as that is the only way to reduce crime in the society. Today criminals have no fear of any punishment because either the judiciary is too slow and corrupt or is involved in social service with gender obsessed statements.

Justice Katju had also made controversial statement, Bow down before your wife wherein he told; listen to your wife, even if she sounds unreasonable. Such statements from the judiciary send a strong signal to men that they should not expect justice from the courts and the question still remains open, “Who will save men who are burnt?”

My question to Justice Katju, “Can you?”, “Will you?”

Techie sues wife FOR ‘giving’ dowry

The wedding photos of Virag and Viral

A Bangalore-based software engineer has filed a case against his wife and in-laws for paying him dowry. His contention: Giving dowry is as much an offence as receiving it

Demanding dowry is a crime, so is giving it. In a first of its kind in the state, a city-based software engineer jailed for taking dowry has filed a case against his wife and in-laws for ‘giving’ him dowry.

Virag Dhulia, 28, who had been imprisoned for two days, was later released on bail.

Virag has filed cases against his wife Viral Goda and his in-laws saying they had paid him dowry. Virag separated from his wife within two months of their marriage. Viral and her parents filed a complaint in the Mahadevapura police station saying they had paid Virag Rs 12 lakh as dowry.

Not to take it lying down, he too filed a complaint against them. “My wife says I have received dowry, which is illegal. But it’s equally illegal to give dowry. So I have filed a case against her,” he said.

“I have not taken any dowry, but they have filed a false case against me. I am shocked at the steps taken by my wife. I read law books and filed the case. This is my answer to my wife who has filed false cases against me,” Virag said.

As per the law, giving dowry is as much a crime as demanding it. Hence, it attracts equal punishment under Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Police records clearly say his wife and in-laws had paid him dowry, but he had not demanded it. The case has been admitted in Tenth Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Mayo Hall. In January this year, the court directed the jurisdiction police to investigate the case and file a first information report.

Virag said, “The misuse of Dowry Prohibition Act and Domestic Violence Act should be stopped or it can get many innocent people into trouble.”

“I don’t know what the police are doing. Even after the court ordered an inquiry, the police have not done anything,” he alleged.

WIFE’S CHARGE
Viral filed dowry harassment case against Virag on September 10, 2007. “I was harassed mentally and physically by my husband and his parents. They tortured me for more dowry. They demanded Rs 12 lakh more as dowry and warned that if they don’t get money, I would be sent back,” said her complaint.

Viral has alleged Virag had assaulted her for more money and she was “not allowed to eat ‘good food’ and not allowed to talk to friends”. “I was feeling insecure,” she has said. Virag, however, denied all these allegations. “I have already said all her allegations are baseless. She did all this as I didn’t come out of my family,” he said.

SHORT MARRIAGE
Virag and Viral married on February 12, 2007 in Kolkata. Virat is a software engineer working in i2 Technologies located in Marathahalli in Bangalore. She was staying with him in Bangalore, where Virag had bought her a flat. Virag’s parents too were staying with him as he was their only son.

“I bought her a flat and I loved her very much. Problems started after a month. She didn’t want to stay with my parents,” said Virag.

“She asked me to separate from my parents and started demanding more money. She went to her parents’ house, but did not come back. Virag called her several times, visited her and even wrote to her. But she didn’t return,” said Virag.

Later, she came with her parents and uncles and filed dowry harassment cases against him. “She also asked for a divorce and filed for maintenance which I am paying,” he said.

Case history
Husband’s name: Virag R Dhulia
Wife’s name: Viral V Dhulia
Police station: Mahadevapura PS
Court: X ACMM, Mayo Hall Court
Case status: FIR registered by police. No action taken
Sections filed: Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 for ‘voluntary confessional admission’ of having given dowry, Section 120(B) IPC – criminal conspiracy, Section 34 IPC – common intention

SIF Activist tutors RTI Act to Police

This is a true incident being described here. Brief background, is that an accused in a false dowry case filed an RTI Application with the local jurisdictional police to inquire about the investigations of the case. As he did not get the reply in the stipulated 30 days, he filed a complaint with the State Information Commission (SIC) regarding the same. One week after that he got the reply, however, the case in SIC came up for hearing. Meanwhile the accused who is also a SIF (Save Indian Family) activist, filed another RTI.2 days after filing that RTI he got a call from the PS to collect the copies. He was very happy for the quick response. So he goes to the PS to collect copies. This is what happens at the police station.

For reference, accused is designated as SIF Activist and the police people as Police.

SIF Activist: I got a call from your station for my RTI filed. Please give me the copies.

Police: But you have taken the copies your signature is also there.

SIF Activist: No I haven’t, can I have a look?

Police: Sure.

After having a look at the copies, the SIF activist understood the confusion. The police people were still stuck at the reply of the old RTI having replied after 60 days of the application filed while he was thinking of the new RTI filed.

SIF Activist: Oh this one. Yeah I have got the reply but you replied to me 60 days after I filed the application, whereas the act says you have to reply in 30 days. So I filed the complaint under Section 18(1) (C) of the RTI Act, 2005.

 Police: Oh I see. So now what do we have to do?

Clear confusion was visible on the faces of the police as they were being taught RTI Act by a STUPID COMMON MAN.

SIF Activist: Nothing, you have replied me but I did not get the reply in 30 days as the ACT says, so now your officer has to go and explain this to the State Information Commission that why he could not reply within 30 days when all he was supposed to do was to Xerox existing documents and send them.

Police: Oh, can you explain this to our sir?

SIF Activist: OK.

Waits for 8-10 minutes and sees that the officer was busy with something and also thought it was the officer’s duty to read the Act and comply.

SIF Activist: I am getting late. You tell the officer whatever I told you I am leaving.

The police people were flummoxed to see a Stupid Common Man walking into the police station and teaching laws to them. This is the pathetic condition of the Indian police. They are not aware even of the basics of the law, let alone complications, intricacies and its implications. Can we entrust the law and order and investigation of crimes to such a lax agency that does not know a law even after 4 years of it being passed?

Questions every citizen and law maker needs to ponder upon.

Is it not time that, “No policing is the best policing”, that the current police force can offer?

Or is it time to scrap the entire police force and rebuild it?

TNIE-C Survey: People blame lawyers

CHENNAI: Twice as many people blame the lawyers than the police for the violence at the Madras High Court last week. It is not surprising then that public opinion about lawyers is so low that half the people polled in a survey commissioned by The New Indian Express did not want their children to become lawyers, while only one-fifth did.

 

The violence erupted on February 19, when the police went to the High Court to investigate the egg pelting two days earlier of Subramanian Swamy. A clash between lawyers and police ensued, which carried on the next day, and which has forced the closure of courts since. 

The New Indian Express survey of 500 Chennaiites, carried out by research organisation C fore, makes it clear that the public sees the lawyers as the culprits of the current standoff between the executive and the judiciary. 

Respondents overwhelmingly disapproved of the egg pelting. Some lawyers have, post-clashes, asserted that the community also did not approve of the egg pelting, but this appears to have got drowned in the din. 

What has etched itself in the public mind, rather, has been the trade-union-manner in which the lawyers reacted when the police tried to take action in the egg-pelting incident. A third of those polled said the culprits should have been arrested immediately; and there were almost as many responses favouring the debarring of lawyers, as there were favouring a probe by the acting chief justice. 

The public antipathy towards the lawyers can be gauged by the fact that exactly twice as many respondents to The New Indian Express poll favoured police action at the courts, as those who approved of the police inaction during the caste-based rampage by law students in November. 

If anything, the public’s message to lawyers is clear: No one should presume to be above the law. 

Who is responsible for Thursday’s violence at the Madras High Court? 

The police 17 

Both are equally guilty 49 

The lawyers 34 

Twice as many people blame the lawyers as those who blame police. 

What should have been the proper course of action after the egg-pelting? 

The lawyers responsible be stripped of their licence to practice law 21 

The acting Chief Justice of the High Court investigate the matter 25 

Police arrest the culprits immediately 32 

The lawyers association investigate the matter 10 

The matter should have been forgotten 12 

Why are the lawyers resorting to strike? 

To bring attention to the plight of Sri Lankan Tamils 19 

To protest high-handed police action 69 

To protest inadequate facilities in the High Court 3 

None of the above 9 

How do you feel about some lawyers pelting Subramaniam Swamy with eggs inside a courtroom? 

Approve 13 

Disapprove 68 

Have no view 19 

You support 

Police action to quell the lawyers unrest at high court 38 

Police inaction when law college students went on the rampage 19 

Did not support either of the options 43 

Do you want your son/daughter to be a lawyer? 

Yes 20 

Don’t know/Can’t say 31 

No 49 

Methodology: C fore conducted the survey in Chennai on 23 and 24 February, 2009. A questionnaire was sent to 500 people of different socio-economic categories.  Forty-one per cent were women. All figures are in percentages. 

feedback@epmltd.com

Press Release welcoming the CrPC Amendment Bill 2008

PRESS RELEASE

Sub: Presenting our views welcoming the CrPC Amendment Bill 2008 as passed.

Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), a NGO dedicated to Gender Equality and human rights is voicing support of the recent amendments to Code of Criminal Procedures (CrPC), which will put an end to arbitrary arrests and detention by police. President Pratibha Patil signed this CrPC amendment bill. This amendment is expected to improve the human rights record of India and greatly reduce the corruption and extortion in police stations. This will also reduce false complaints and will stop people using police for settling personal and political scores and vendettas. A whopping 40 lac people get arrested in India every year, without justifiable reasons.

• Please note, this amendment does not take away the “power to arrest” by police.
• Police can arrest the accused provided police has the warrant.
• Police can also detain the accused, question and investigate.

The Supreme Court of India has voiced in its various landmark judgments that, “Arrest of a person is a very serious matter and a wrongful arrest causes grave ignominy to the person.”

The third report of the National Police Commission, referring to the quality of arrest by the police in India had mentioned that “power of arrest was one of the chief sources of corruption in the police. The report suggested that by and large nearly 60% of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2% of the expenditure of the prison department.”

As this law gets implemented,

1. From now on, police cannot arrest a person easily, if they do not have arrest warrant.
2. Police can arrest an accused person in a crime having sentence of less than 7 years, only if the accused does not cooperate with police. The police have to give the reasons for arrest in writing.
3. This amendment does not take away the “power to arrest” of police. It only puts checks and balances to police’s powers, which will go a long way in stopping abuse, torture, corruption and extortion in police stations. With this accountability structure in place, now police will be held accountable, if they do any arbitrary arrests without evidence or investigation.
4. As police will be free from involvement in personal and political vendettas, the false criminal cases will reduce in the country. It is police and lawyers, who used to gain maximum by encouraging people to file false criminal complaints against each other. This is certain to stop.
5. With this amendment, even politicians cannot use police against each other for political vendetta.

This landmark reform regarding the way police conducts itself will bridge the huge gap between police and the citizens. Till now, Indian police inherited unconditional power of arrest from police in British Raj, whose goal was to enforce fear in the minds of people of India. Indian police enjoyed the maximum powers to arrest people arbitrarily compared to many evolved democracies in the world.

It is to be noted that more than 1,23,000 women were arrested and most of them jailed in last 4 years under section 498a of IPC without investigation or evidence. This itself shows the enormous powers that police used to enjoy.

Please refer to statistics from National Crime Records Bureau:
http://ncrb.nic.in/cii2007/cii-2007/Snapshots.pdf

27,80,559 persons were arrested under IPC crimes and 40,87,246 persons were arrested under SLL crimes in year 2007. Overall 68,67,805 persons were arrested both under IPC and SLL crimes in 2007.

Of which 60% being unnecessary, 40 lacs unnecessary arrests took place in 2007. If police is busy making these 40 lacs (4 million) unnecessary arrests and extorting money, then how can it prevent criminals and terrorists? Where will police get the focus to fight crime?
There are also agencies, who are trying to mislead people by propagating false information about the amendment to CrPC.

Some of the salient features of amendments to Section 41 of the CrPC, pertaining to power of arrests with police are,

   1. The amendment proposes that the police officer may, instead of arresting the person concerned, issue a notice of appearance, asking him to cooperate with the police officer in the probe.
   2. Where such a notice is issued to any person, it shall be the duty of that person to comply with the terms of the notice and arrest can be made only if the person fails to comply with the notice.

   3. Every police officer while making an arrest shall “bear an accurate visible and clear identification of his name.” At the time of arrest, the memorandum shall be attested by at least one witness, who is a member of the family of the person arrested or a respectable member of the locality where the arrest is made.

Often it is found that due to lack of checks on the police’s power to arrest, this power is misused especially in offenses under Section 498A, where it is possible for a married woman to implicate the entire family in a false dowry harassment case. The family is shown the fear of jailing and often either hefty bribes (or extortion amount) to the tune of lacs even are taken from the husband and his family to spare them the ignominy of arrest. 

SIFF extends full support to the Government in making these amendments a part of the official gazette. Some of the benefits of making these amendments are:-

1.    This amendment will reduce corruption, abuse and extortion in police stations.

2.    Often the enormous “power to arrest” given to police used to result in personal and political vendettas. People used to influence police to settle personal and political scores. The amendment will put an end to all these dangerous activities.

3.    This is the next revolutionary incident after passing of RTI act so far as anti-corruption drive is concerned.

4.    This will bring focus to the activities of police towards creating a crime free and terror free society. At present, police worry more about the extortion money every month than terrorism or crime in the city.

5.    Even politicians can not influence the police now to get their opponents arrested arbitrarily.

6.    It is to be noted that people are sent to jail (or judicial custody) by a magistrate and not by police. So, people who are accused of crime will as usual be sent to jail after police completes investigation.

7.    As per the third report of National Police Commission, since 60% of the arrests are unnecessary and unjustified, it means that in the jails, 60% innocent people have mixed with 40% criminals. This amendment will put an end to this dangerous trend.

8.    SIFF is in touch with some reputed senior lawyers in Bangalore and they have opinioned that these amendments are a positive step towards a better civil society.

A gory picture of the misuse of the power to arrest is evident from the fact that, 1,23,000 women have been arrested in the last four years (2004-2007), as per National Crime Records Bureau, on a mere complaint, without trial or investigation, in offenses under Section 498A. These women are the mothers, sisters, and sister-in-laws and female children in the family of men who are mostly falsely implicated in such cases as section 498A of the IPC has come under serious scanner of being heavily misused. With this amendment in place, such gruesome mishaps on women can be averted.

It is a misrepresentation of the good intentions of the Government of India that the current proposed amendment will work to help criminals. The current proposed amendment nowhere does curtail the powers of the police to arrest criminals. It merely streamlines and regulates the process to put checks on misuse of the power and tends to introduce a sense of accountability and opposing such a regularization of process only points to the existing anarchy in the system which needs a serious check

It is left to the choice of the Government of India whether it wants to support anarchy or regularization. India is a democracy which requires high concern of the life and liberty of its citizens. Regularization of process and introduction of accountability is a necessary ingredient of the requirement. Passing this CrPC Amendment, the Government of India will be implementing the above requirement in practicality.

Our Demands

• Immediately implement the CRPC Amendment which aims at stopping arbitrary arrests .
• Immediately Form a 3 member compliance committee consisting of people who have proven themselves innocent with powers to summon and punish the errant officers who may misuse and side steps the intentions of provisions by giving frivolous reasons of arrest.
• Ensure that police provides the compliance order of section 41 on demand to any citizen who requests so that frivolous reasons are not used to justify arrests 

Memorandum to the President of India

To
Her Excellency President of India Smt. Pratibha Devisingh Patil,

Sub: Extending favor and support to the CrPC Amendment Bill 2008

Her Excellency,
We feel privileged to introduce ourselves as Save Indian Family Foundation, an NGO dedicated to the cause of promoting Family Harmony and Gender Equality. Save Indian Family Foundation and its allied partner NGOs have taken up cudgels against the rampant Legal Terrorism going on in the country in the last few years by way of misuse of various marital laws, drawn in favor of women which has led to phenomenal increase in the suicides of married men, senior citizens being thrown out of their houses and the foundations of a fatherless society being laid down. In a nutshell the erosion of values has set itself in the precincts of one of the most treasured social institutions i.e. the Indian Family.
Even the Honorable Supreme Court in its various judgments has sounded alarm bells to take serious note of the situation. We feel constrained to draw your attention to a remark made by the Honorable Supreme Court in its landmark judgment Joginder Kumar vs. State of UP 1994, AIR 1349 1994 SCC (4) 260 JT 1994 (3) 423 1994 SCALE (2)662, attached as Annexure A, about arrests as,
“No arrest can be made because it is lawful for the police officer to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing. The justification for the exercise of it is quite another. The police officer must be able to justify the arrest apart from his power to do so. Arrest and detention in police lock-up of a person can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent for a police officer in the interest of protection of the constitutional rights of a citizen and perhaps in his own interest that no arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bona fides of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the person’s complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. The recommendations of the Police Commission merely reflect the constitutional concomitants of the fundamental right to personal liberty and freedom. A person is not liable to arrest merely on the suspicion of complicity in an offence. There must be some reasonable justification in the opinion of the officer affecting the arrest that such arrest is necessary and justified. Except in heinous offences, an arrest must be avoided if a police officer issues notice to person to attend the Station House and not to leave the Station without permission would do.”
Above statements seriously reflect the ignominy brought upon an innocent citizen of India, by a wrongful arrest. As per the third report of National Police Commission referred in Writ Petition No. 4861/2000 in the High Court of Allahabad attached as Annexure B, 60% of the arrests are either unnecessary or such unjustified which accounts for 43.2% of the expenditure of the jails which is a great burden on the exchequer.
All these facts point to a saddening fact that the power to arrest is seriously misused by the police especially in non-bailable and cognizable offenses like IPC 498A wherein 1,23,000 women have been arrested in the last four years (2004-2007) on a mere complaint, without trial or investigation. These women are the mothers, sisters, and sister-in-laws and female children in the family of men who are mostly falsely implicated in such cases as section 498A of the IPC has come under serious scanner of being heavily misused.
In wake of all the above factual averments, the current proposed CrPC Amendment Bill, 2008, having amendment pertaining to Section 41(1)-a of the Criminal Procedure of Code, 2008 wherein the police can issue, “Notice of Appearance” before actually arresting the person for crimes having punishment up to seven years. If the person does not co-operate in investigations then only the police officer can arrest with proper justification. This is a very positive step taken by the Government of India to curb the misuse of arrest power by police and Save Indian Family Foundation and its allied partner NGOs extend their full support to the amendment.
Some noteworthy points in this connection:-
1. Save Indian Family Foundation believes as per attached media report, Annexure C, that there is a section of lawyers who are intending to strike against the proposed amendment which is a very serious concern. It is only a very small section of lawyers who are running their bread and butter on arrests of people and bail proceedings and the extortion involved therein who are protesting the amendment.
2. It is a very underestimated nexus of corruption between the police and this section of lawyers wherein frivolous cases under these sections are made up and then extortions are made in the name of ‘settlement and compromise’ under the hanging sword of ‘potential judicial custody’. It is a very heinous process thriving on the fracas of the carcass of the family values and needs serious condemnation and discouragement.
3. Further, it will be imperative to mention here that lawyers are ‘Custodians of the Constitution’ and not ‘Creators of the Constitution’. Save Indian Family Foundation is concerned that giving in to the protests of these lawyers will prevent the Government from taking a much needed positive step to salvage the damaged image and eroded trust of the ‘Stupid Common Man’ on the system especially the Police and the Judiciary.
4. It can as well seriously affect the lawyers’ business because people will either refrain from going to such lawyers or will change their services immediately as such lawyers are not believed to be acting in the general interest of people, rather they want their business running at the expense of the society.
5. As presented by them that the current proposed amendment will work to help criminals is again a misrepresentation of the good intentions of the Government of India. The current proposed amendment nowhere does curtail the powers of the police to arrest criminals. It merely streamlines and regulates the process to put checks on misuse of the power and tends to introduce a sense of accountability. Opposing such a regularization of process only points to the existing anarchy in the system which needs a serious check.
It is left to the choice of the Government of India whether it wants to support anarchy or regularization. India is a democracy which needs to have high concern of the life and liberty of its citizens. Regularization of process and introduction of accountability is a necessary ingredient of the requirement. Passing this CrPC Amendment, the Government of India will be implementing the above requirement in practicality.
Save Indian Family Foundation does believe and hope the Government of India will take the above concerns, factual averments and considerations seriously and expects full co-operation from the Government to kill functional anarchy in the system.
Enclosures,
1) Annexure A : Judgment copy of Joginder Kumar vs. State of UP 1994, AIR 1349 1994 SCC (4) 260 JT 1994 (3) 423 1994 SCALE (2)662
2) Annexure B : Copy of Writ Petition no. WP 4861/2000 HC Allahabad Ajit Singh alias Muraha vs. State of UP containing reference to the third report of National Police Commission.
3) Annexure C : Media report, reporting the proposed strike by lawyers.