The policemen claimed that though they had passed on the instructions, it was not complied with.
Law calls upon the state to provide monetary compensation in cases of illegal detention by police. However, a city court has gone a step further and asked Delhi Police to tender a written apology to a salesman who was wrongfully arrested by its personnel.
Surender Kumar, who was a salesman at a footwear showroom in Shakthi Nagar — within the limits of Roop Nagar police station — was arrested for not complying with a police circular to install a CCTV camera in the shop. However, the court said it was the showroom owner and not the salesman who was required to carry out the instructions.
Discharging Kumar, Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Dharmender Rana awarded him a compensation of Rs 28,800 and asked the DCP (north) to tender a written apology. “In order to win back the confidence of victim Surender in the established institutions of this great democratic nation, this court would prefer to move a step ahead of the traditional approach of awarding only monetary compensation… This court is of the considered opinion that… a written apology from the district head of police, i.e. DCP North, acknowledging follies of his subordinates… would go a long way in not only healing the wounds of the victim but also upholding the cherished motto ‘Shanti Seva Nyaya’ of Delhi Police”, the order said.
Of the compensation amount, Rs 27,800 was awarded under Section 250 CRPC as the court found no ground for the accusations against Kumar. The court said this will be borne equally by the personnel concerned — ASI Kesar Singh, SHO Roop Nagar, Inspector Ram Niwas and ACP Niyati Mittal Kashyap. Rs 1,000 was awarded under Section 358 for groundless arrest. This will be shared by ASI Singh and the SHO, the court said, adding that the amount will be deducted from their salary.
The matter pertains to a circular issued by ACP Sarai Rohilla on June 28, 2016, “making it obligatory upon owner of any commercial establishment… to install good quality CCTV cameras… within a period of two months from the date of publication of said notification”.
The policemen claimed that though they had passed on the instructions, it was not complied with.
Kumar was charged under IPC Section 188, arrested and granted bail. But the court found that the said circular imposed the obligation on the “owner”. “The difficulty in detection of the real culprit would not grant a license to… nab a poor salesman, who, owing to his professional constraints and socio-economic status, assumes silence about his employer’s misdeeds…,” the court said, censuring police.
