Power hits back, thrashing victim inspector too booked for criminal intimidation, rioting
Say it pressure tactics or monopolistic and autocratic attitude of the SAD-BJP government, a day after the local police registered a criminal case against the erring SAD councillor for thrashing a municipal corporation building inspector, the latter was also booked on Wednesday under different sections of the IPC.punjab Updated: Dec 04, 2013 21:42 IST
Say it pressure tactics or monopolistic and autocratic attitude of the SAD-BJP government, a day after the local police registered a criminal case against the erring SAD councillor for thrashing a municipal corporation building inspector, the latter was also booked on Wednesday under different sections of the IPC.
Sources in the police department said that after a lot of hiccups, the police have registered a case under section 451 ((house-trespass in order to commit offence) and under various sections including demanding bribe and blackmailing against MC building branch inspector Harbans Singh. The case was registered at Tripari police station.
Harbans was allegedly mercilessly beaten up by SAD councillor from ward number 9 Sandeep Singh Sandhu, while he was on duty to identify and stop illegal construction in the Preet Nagar area in Sandhu's ward.
Following the incident, the local police on Monday booked Sandhu along with 15-16 unidentified persons under sections 323 (punishment for causing injuries voluntarily), 341 (punishment for wrongful restraint), 506 (criminal intimidation), 148 (whoever is guilty of rioting) and 149 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.
However, the police have yet to make any arrest in the case.
Meanwhile, after registration of the case against Sandhu, the fellow SAD councillors demanded the registration of a case against the inspector also for his absurd behaviour and demanding bribe from the jeweller who was allegedly indulging in illegal construction.
The councillors had alleged that Harbans Singh was under the influence of liquor at the time of the incident and demanded a bribe of Rs 50,000 from the jeweller if he wanted to carry on with the construction of the building.
SAD councillors had also handed over a memorandum regarding their demand to the senior superintendent of police (SSP).
Interestingly, Wednesday's development in the case would surely hot up the issue once again perhaps forcing the employees to again go on strike. The employees had resumed work after two days of protest and pen down strike on Tuesday.
One of the senior police officers, on the condition of anonymity, said, "The police had received a complaint against the inspector soon after the incident on Saturday and on the basis of that the case has been registered against him".
However, claims of the police raised have several eyebrows against the police action after four days of the crime.
Senior superintendent of police Hardyal Singh Mann could not be contacted despite several attempts.
Meanwhile, Ajaib Singh, president of the MC employees union, said though they have yet to receive a copy of the FIR but they have already come to know about the registration of the case against the inspector from police sources.
"The action will be initiated once we got the FIR copy. It has been done at the behest of senior leaders and officers of the administration. If the police had received the complaint against Harbans on the day of the incident, then why the FIR was registered on Wednesday and not on the same day", he said.