Official Guidelines for Voter Registration (Form 6)himaenshu
Official Guidelines for Voter Registration (Form 6) from Election Commission of India. As it is copy of voter registration guidelines published by ECI.
Freedom of Information request revealing the Ministry of Justice's involvement in criminally falsifying documents with Humberside Police as an accomplice deleted by WhatDoTheyKnow
The only pro-democracy, citizen friendly law, the Right to Information Act, has been subverted blatantly by the very information commissioners who have been appointed at exorbitant cost to the exchequer to enforce it. Here is another example of such subversion by none other than the Chief Information Commissioner of Kerala, Vinson M Paul, former DGP and Direcor Vigilance of the State.
Facebook's Business Model Challenged Following EU Regulator RulingBarry Schuman
Earlier today, February 7, 2019, the Bundeskartellamt (Germany's national competition regulator) issued a monumental ruling which prohibits Facebook from combining user data from different sources. The decision concerns all private users of Facebook based in Germany, however it is likely to be followed by similar rulings worldwide, and specifically throughout the EU.
Petition seeking stay on the arrest of Jumman and Parvazsabrangsabrang
Petition seeking a stay on the arrests of Jumman and Parvaz was heard on Wednesday before a bench comprising of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice D K Singh, the court had stayed the arrest of Jumman. As Parvaz is in Judicial custody his legal team will now apply for his bail as that is the legal remedy available
Official Guidelines for Voter Registration (Form 6)himaenshu
Official Guidelines for Voter Registration (Form 6) from Election Commission of India. As it is copy of voter registration guidelines published by ECI.
Freedom of Information request revealing the Ministry of Justice's involvement in criminally falsifying documents with Humberside Police as an accomplice deleted by WhatDoTheyKnow
The only pro-democracy, citizen friendly law, the Right to Information Act, has been subverted blatantly by the very information commissioners who have been appointed at exorbitant cost to the exchequer to enforce it. Here is another example of such subversion by none other than the Chief Information Commissioner of Kerala, Vinson M Paul, former DGP and Direcor Vigilance of the State.
Facebook's Business Model Challenged Following EU Regulator RulingBarry Schuman
Earlier today, February 7, 2019, the Bundeskartellamt (Germany's national competition regulator) issued a monumental ruling which prohibits Facebook from combining user data from different sources. The decision concerns all private users of Facebook based in Germany, however it is likely to be followed by similar rulings worldwide, and specifically throughout the EU.
Petition seeking stay on the arrest of Jumman and Parvazsabrangsabrang
Petition seeking a stay on the arrests of Jumman and Parvaz was heard on Wednesday before a bench comprising of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice D K Singh, the court had stayed the arrest of Jumman. As Parvaz is in Judicial custody his legal team will now apply for his bail as that is the legal remedy available
Humberside Police Appeals Body outcome (4 April, 2019) to appeal against the decision of Humberside Police's Professional Standards department (PSD) in respect of a complaint (ref: CO/498/17). This matter concerns a police conduct complaint submitted 14 July 2017 raising issues about the PSD and an Investigating Officer who had not bothered to open a previous conduct complaint file until 370 days after it had been allocated to him. The present matter required by law to be referred to the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC). However, the force wrongly categorised the complaint effectively downplaying the seriousness of it, thus enabling it to be dealt with by way of Local Resolution (not fully investigated). Further mishandling followed, presumably as a deliberate tactic to delay and obfuscate the process due to the seriousness of the allegations. As a consequence it has been referred back twice to the PSD to be dealt with appropriately and has so far (17 March 2020) been ongoing 977 days
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying to
direct the respondent to register FIR, investigate and file a final
report on the complaint dated 12.08.2015 given by the petitioner.
2
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
3. On a complaint lodged by one Ramachandran (the first
petitioner herein), a case in Crime No.21 of 2014 has been
registered by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch,
Tiruvallulur, against Kannan Iyer (A1), who was working as
Manager in Central Bank of India, Pattaraiperumbudur Branch. The
allegation against the accused is that, he has forged the signature
of Bank customers and had defalcated the amounts. Now these
petitioners have given a complaint dated 12.08.2015 against one
Sathyamurthy, Viswanathan and Emanuel, whom the petitioners
alleged were accomplices of the said Kannan Iyer.
4. In the considered opinion of this Court, no second FIR.,
can be registered for the same transaction. During the course of
investigation, if material surfaces about the involvement of said
accused, it is needless to state that the Police shall make them as
accused and take action in accordance with law.
APPEAL CASE NO. 2422 OF 2019 Kanika aka Kusum Relan D/o Sh. Sita Ram Relan, 5...tigele
SIC, HARYANA
SCO NO. 70-71, SECTOR 8-C, CHANDIGARH
APPEAL CASE NO. 2422 OF 2019
Appellant Ms. Kusum Relan D/o Sh. Sita Ram Relan,
5/335, Railway Road, Sonepat.
Chief Information Commissioner Shri Yash Pal Singal
2. Ms. Kusum Relan, the appellant addressed RTI dated 22.03.2018 to the SPIO of the office of Superintendent of Police, Sonepat and submitted that a complaint dated 11.03.2016 was lodged by her with the police against Sh. Navneet Verma and his family but it was withdrawn in the morning of next day. The In-charge of the Police Station instead of returning the complaint kept it on the record stating that it has now been filed. The complaint was withdrawn in view of the respect of her parents in the society. Thereafter, Sh. Navneet Verma has been able to obtain the copy of the said complaint under the provision of RTI applications and succeeded in spoiling her future by taking up the matter with her in-laws.
3. The respondent SPIO further submitted that appellant is making allegation that her complaint dated 11.03.2016 has been shared with information seeker who used the said complaint with her in-laws. Now, on the complaint lodged by the applicant against her husband, a case no. 794 of 2017 has been registered under section 323, 354, 377, 406, 498 A, 506, 34 IPC, in City Police Station, Sonepat and challan of the case stands put in the court of jurisdiction.
4. Sh. Sita Ram Relan, represented the appellant, alleged that the respondent SPIO has not acted in accordance with the provision of RTI Act, 2005 and furnished information to third party which was closely related to her daughter . The said information was later on misused and the future of her daughter has been spoilt. He prayed for taking strong action against the SPIO and also requested to grant the appellant compensation for the detriment and mental agony caused to her.
5. The Commission carefully considered the matter. Records of the case have been perused. The averments submitted by the parties have been noted. The appellant has agitated for wrongly furnishing of personal information to third party which was later on misused and her future has been spoilt. The representative of the appellant requested to take action against the SPIO and compensate the appellant as per provisions of the Act. The Commission in is regard perused Section 21 of the RTI Act, 2005 reads as under:-
“ No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act or any rule made thereunder.”
The Commission cannot take any action against the respondent SPIO in view of the fact no mala fide of SPIO has been established and in view of the provision of Section 21 of the Act as reproduced above.
6. In view of the above stated facts, the Commission decides to close the matter. Announced. To be communicated.
Sd/-
(Yash Pal Singal)
Place : Chandigarh. CIC,
Dated: 24.04.2019 Haryana.
1. 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.04.2015
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
Crl.O.P.SR.No.15141 of 2015
P.Chandira .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Inspector of Police,
Kavindapadi Erode District
2. The Inspector of Police,
District Crime, Erode District
3. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Bhavani, Erode District
4. Inspector of Police,
Bhavani, Erode District
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Bhavani, Erode District
6. The Superintendent of Police,
Erode District
7. The Director General of Police,
Chennai .. Respondents
2. 2
Prayer:- Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to direct
the respondents to register the complaint of the petitioner to find out the
person who signed my grand father's forgery signature as he was not
able to sign from 17.05.1999 and made thumb impression in Partition
deed.
For petitioner/ Party in person : Ms.P.Chandira
O R D E R
This petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the
respondents to register the complaint of the petitioner to find out the
person who signed her grand father's forgery signature as he was not
able to sign from 17.05.1999 and made thumb impression in Partition
deed. This petition is listed today under the caption “for maintainability”.
2. Heard the petitioner, party-in-person and perused the materials
placed on record.
3. Even according to the petitioner, she lodged a complaint, which
has been investigated by the police and final report has been filed
before learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Bhavani. It is alleged by the
petitioner that her grand father's Will dated 02.06.1999 has been forged
by some persons. It is to be noted that for the incident that is alleged to
3. 3
have been taken place in the year 1999, the petitioner wants to conduct
investigation in the year 2015. Therefore, positive direction to the police
cannot be given to conduct investigation in the case. However, it is
open to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court by challenging the Will
by filing appropriate application.
With the above observation, this petition is closed and the
objection raised by the Registry is upheld.
16.04.2015
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
ssd
P.N.PRAKASH,J.,
ssd
To
4. 4
1. The Inspector of Police,
Kavindapadi Erode District
2. The Inspector of Police,
District Crime, Erode District
3. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Bhavani, Erode District
4. Inspector of Police,
Bhavani, Erode District
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Bhavani, Erode District
6. The Superintendent of Police,
Erode District
7. The Director General of Police,
Chennai
8. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
Crl.O.P.SR.No.15141 of 2015
16.04.2015