Secular stupidity vs Snoop scandal

We are living in interesting times.  A verbal fracas has broken out on 24/7 television  channels  about the  due  protection given by the Gujarat police  to a  young girl   whose father had sought help to protect  her from  the alleged harassment  by  a  suspected  stalker.

The   so-called snoop-scandal debate has degenerated to the lowest depth of a secularly stupid discourse which  ought  to have been avoided.  The only  essential requirement is a simple one.  Those  questioning the legality of  the police response to the call of the  distraught  father of  the young girl must read the   directions contained in  Sections  44  and  145  of the Criminal Procedure Code  to understand the statutory  responsibility  assigned to the police. 

Section  44  of  Cr.P.C.  requires that  every Indian citizen aware of the likely commission of  a  serious  offence  should  forthwith give that  information to  the police without fail.  The action of the girl’s father in seeking police help was  thus  fully  covered by law.  He was seeking no favour.

Now let us  try to comprehend  the duty  which the criminal law imposes on the police.    Section  149  of  the Cr. P.C. lays down that   “Every  police  officer may interpose for the purpose of preventing, and shall, to the best of his ability, prevent the commission of  any cognizable offence”.  And that was  all  that the Gujarat  Police did.

Most police officers, including me,  have intervened to the best of  their ability whenever such an incident  was brought to their notice.

So, dear news anchors and political activists, where is the need for a judicial enquiry?  More importantly what do you expect the presiding judge of the Inquiry Commission to do beyond the directions given by law ? 

Responses