Police refute CM’s non-cooperation charge, point-by-point

The Indian Express had reported Friday that Kejriwal, on November 7, had listed 10 points in the letter to the MHA alleging non-cooperation of the police. The MHA had asked Delhi Police to respond at the “earliest”.

[related-post]

“Hounding” of AAP MLAs by digging up old cases and creating new ones against them; security at hospitals; law and order; transfer/posting of police officers; Meenakshi murder case (the 19-year-old was stabbed to death, allegedly by her neighbours on July 16 in Anand Parbat); FIRs not filed in VAT and water tanker cases; threat to sub-divisional magistrates (SDMs) and security of officers were among points raised by the CM.

In his response, Mishra said the reasons for the aggression against government doctors were inadequate infrastructure, skewed patient-to-bed ratio, vacant posts and lack of basic amenities. He urged the government to take a holistic view for a permanent solution. “All field officers were directed to provide security in hospitals. Moreover, during the enforcement of ESMA, Delhi Police had provided an additional force i.e. one section each at major hospitals…” wrote Mishra.
On the law and order front, in which Kejriwal had mentioned a woman constable being the victim of chain snatching, Mishra said, “Snatching is a crime which is generally committed by youth belonging to the marginalised sections of our society… Such thieves and snatchers are being regularly arrested by local police on day-to-day basis.”

He also said allegations of the police hounding AAP MLAs and threatening sub-divisional magistrates (SDMs) were baseless and figment of imagination. “Around 51 cases in total have been registered against AAP MLAs. Some of these cases are old and have already been concluded in the court of law. At present, 23 cases are pending investigation and 23 cases are pending trial in court. Out of the 46 current cases, only 13 MLAs (now), have been arrested on the available evidence and in most of the cases, they have been remanded to police/judicial custody. Actions in all cases have been on merits and without any bias or prejudice.”

Mishra added, in fact, “police personnel now feel that they are being hounded by the workers of AAP party and its political higher ups.”

He also wrote, “It has been observed that SDMs have been repeatedly transgressing their lawful realms of responsibilities and thereby causing deliberate act of interference in the process of investigation…” Mishra’s letter cites important cases in which SDMs conducted inquiries even after FIR had been registered. These include death during police custody, the Kerala House incident and farmer’s death at Jantar Mantar.

On water tankers, Mishra said the police as a policy register FIRs invariably in all the complaints received if they disclose any cognizable offence. “So far there has been only one instance where three private water tankers coming from Haryana were intercepted by SDM (Saket) and action has been taken by local police. Therefore, allegations of non-cooperation by Delhi Police is wrong and frivolous.”

He added that security to any individual was provided on threat perception. The security to anyone including DMs shall be provided in case inputs of specific threat to the person concerned is received, he said. On the Meenakshi murder case, he claimed there was no lapse on the part of the police officer in the case. On access to police officers, Mishra wrote that phone numbers of senior police officers, DCPs, ACPs and SHOs were already on the Delhi Police website.