Punishing erring policemen an exception, not rule
If you thought that policemen were above the law, you were right. Kunal Purohit reports.mumbai Updated: Mar 03, 2011 02:03 IST
If you thought that policemen were above the law, you were right. According to the information obtained from the Mumbai police under the Right to Information (RTI) application filed by Opera House activist Jeet Ghadge, corruption cases against 52 policemen have been pending since 2005.
Shockingly, in the same period, only nine cops were convicted for graft charges. The Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) arrested 52 policemen for graft charges since January 1, 2005.
This list includes 19 police sub-inspectors and 14 police constables. In the same period, special courts convicted only nine cops.
A senior official from the ACB, not wishing to be named said the anti-corruption body couldn’t be blamed.
“Once these cases go to the courts, we lose control over them. There is a general backlog of cases, even in our special courts. Hence, it takes time,” the official added.
However, the official added that the delay in conviction is purposeful.
“Before we prosecute cops, we need to ask the director-general of police’s approval. Hence, there is unnecessary delay in getting this nod too.”
Ghadge, who obtained information in this matter, said, “One major reason for poor conviction rate is the ACB doesn’t file water tight cases, thus often makes sure that the courts don’t take strict measures against cops.”
About the delay, he said, “We can imagine courts taking time, but why does the ACB take so long in convicting erring policemen? In six years, their special courts gave out their verdict only in nine cases?”
The ACB official, however, refuted such allegations. “We need to file charges based on all the documentary evidence that we can gather. If certain cases are dismissed by the courts for lack of evidence, there is not much we can do.”
Despite repeated attempts, additional commissioner, ACB, Niket Kaushik refused to respond to calls and text messages.