ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. The instant Public Interest Litigation was registered at a suo moto cognizance taken by this Court to a newspaper report in ‘Ahmedabad Mirror’ published on 28.08.2023 involving extortion of a couple in the city of Ahmedabad by two traffic police constables and one Traffic Brigade (TRB Jawan).

2. During the course of proceedings, on deliberation with learned Advocate General Mr. Kamal Trivedi appearing for the State Authorities and Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Krina Calla, learned Amicus, a dedicated toll-free helpline for enabling a person to lodge complaints against the misconduct of Police Officials / TRB Jawans, has been created. The Ministry of Communication has intimated the respondents – State, and all access service providers have cooperated for enabling the short code “14449” allotted as a dedicated helpline to lodge such complaints. In the affidavits filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 - State and the last affidavit dated 26.02.2024, it is demonstrated that the postals / stickers have been pasted throughout the city of Ahmedabad on all strategic positions such as railway stations, airport, bus stands, police stations, courts, important cross-roads of the city and other important places inside the city to spread awareness among the public at large about the said toll-free helpline number. Copies of the photographs of such places giving due publicity of the toll-free helpline number have been appended with the affidavits filed on behalf of State.

3. It is, thus demonstrated that the mandate of the Apex Court in the case of Prakash Singh and Others versus Union of India reported in (2006) 8 SCC 1, has now been followed by the State. It is also demonstrated before us that the first information report had been lodged with respect to the incident which took place on 25.08.2023 at around 1:15 hours and on completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. Disciplinary action has also been taken against the erring police officials who have been identified through CCTV Cameras installed at / near the place of incident.

4. It may be pertinent to mention that policing has to be fair unbiased with sensitivity and caution to maintain the law and order. The responsibility is to protect the life, liberty, property and dignity of the public and prevent harassment while preserving public order. It has to ensure the public welfare, courteous behaviour at the same time providing assistance to the public particularly senior citizen, women, children and other poor individuals and the victims of crime while ensuring impartiality. In the metro cities, the responsibility increases manifold. Police misconduct is a problem which is reflected in many forms. Therefore, in view thereof, it has become essential that accountability of the police officials at different levels have to be defined as they have the maximum visibility in the society and their actions attract public attention. Such kind of misconduct as in the present case tarnishes the image of State Police Force also.

5. With the increase in the work pressure of the police officials, the acts of police malfeasance are also increasing. The departmental mechanism for dealing with such police misconduct should be strengthened so that it inspires public confidence and more so in view of the taint it has got in the present case. In the case at hand, which is an aberration the criminal liability of the police personnel is of personal nature. There was no nexus between the act done and the discharge of official duties and the same was not in the course of performance of the police duty. Therefore, it becomes imperative that there exists a mechanism for police accountability.

6. One of the said mechanism is the Police Complaints Authority as enunciated in the case of Prakash Singh and Others (supra). Any threat to a citizen’s right to life and liberty is viola